How can I prevent/balance waiting and turtling as a response to cooldown mechanics





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







15












$begingroup$


I'm working on a turn-based RPG with classes. I want one of the spellcaster classes to have standard magic points, but another to have abilities with time limitations, one or more of




  • Use ability every N minutes of real time

  • Use ability every N turns of combat

  • Use ability once or N times per day (sleep to restore, or wait out day-night cycle)


There would be restorative items that could restore your "charge". These abilities would be more powerful than regular spells but constrained. This spellcasting class is a burster: gives you big hits but infrequently because of the limitations. The party carries them along as baggage until they get in a jam or run into a boss, then unleashes the hammer. I like it as an option to add depth, and it has interesting speedrun possibilities.



The last one is easy enough to balance if the party has to trek back to town and sleep to recharge, but I have a day-night cycle. Here are the problems as I see it:



Real time / N times per day



Player can just wait. I can make the duration punishing, but then it greatly reduces the utility. It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun.



Every N turns in combat



Player can just have every character defend/heal every round until the burster unleashes another round of big damage. I actually want this to be viable, but I don't want it to become the obviously best strategy for battles. So far it doesn't seem to be a huge issue as the caster just cycles through lesser powers until the big bang recharges. It's rough in the early game, but that's part of the balancing. The problem is that I'm having trouble getting it to be not so OP'd as to be obviously the best while still remaining good enough to be useful.



Any suggestion on how to balance these mechanics to mitigate camping/turtling?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    "just have every character defend/heal every round until ..." - if this is the optimal strategy, this would be a cross-character balancing issue more than an issue with a single character. This would mean that the offensive capability of one character is just way too good compared to all the others, or defensive abilities are, in general, much more powerful than offensive ones.
    $endgroup$
    – Dukeling
    Apr 19 at 17:30








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    If you're going to have a real-time component I would suggest having that apply only outside of combat and use N-turns inside of combat. Using the two together as a single "time" component would make more sense. Turns are essentially an abstraction of time so that the player can make more thought-out decisions.
    $endgroup$
    – Shelby115
    Apr 19 at 18:34






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    "It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun." If they aren't playing the game, it's probably because they don't think it's fun. If players don't like your design concept, consider changing the concept?
    $endgroup$
    – Tim Holt
    Apr 19 at 20:39












  • $begingroup$
    Is there any particular reason why the disincentives are linear? For instance, instead of limiting it to every X, do your systems support things like X+N where N is the # of times used thus far?
    $endgroup$
    – Pikalek
    Apr 20 at 2:51










  • $begingroup$
    @Pikalek that's an interesting idea. I'll play around with that.
    $endgroup$
    – Jared Smith
    Apr 20 at 12:44


















15












$begingroup$


I'm working on a turn-based RPG with classes. I want one of the spellcaster classes to have standard magic points, but another to have abilities with time limitations, one or more of




  • Use ability every N minutes of real time

  • Use ability every N turns of combat

  • Use ability once or N times per day (sleep to restore, or wait out day-night cycle)


There would be restorative items that could restore your "charge". These abilities would be more powerful than regular spells but constrained. This spellcasting class is a burster: gives you big hits but infrequently because of the limitations. The party carries them along as baggage until they get in a jam or run into a boss, then unleashes the hammer. I like it as an option to add depth, and it has interesting speedrun possibilities.



The last one is easy enough to balance if the party has to trek back to town and sleep to recharge, but I have a day-night cycle. Here are the problems as I see it:



Real time / N times per day



Player can just wait. I can make the duration punishing, but then it greatly reduces the utility. It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun.



Every N turns in combat



Player can just have every character defend/heal every round until the burster unleashes another round of big damage. I actually want this to be viable, but I don't want it to become the obviously best strategy for battles. So far it doesn't seem to be a huge issue as the caster just cycles through lesser powers until the big bang recharges. It's rough in the early game, but that's part of the balancing. The problem is that I'm having trouble getting it to be not so OP'd as to be obviously the best while still remaining good enough to be useful.



Any suggestion on how to balance these mechanics to mitigate camping/turtling?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    "just have every character defend/heal every round until ..." - if this is the optimal strategy, this would be a cross-character balancing issue more than an issue with a single character. This would mean that the offensive capability of one character is just way too good compared to all the others, or defensive abilities are, in general, much more powerful than offensive ones.
    $endgroup$
    – Dukeling
    Apr 19 at 17:30








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    If you're going to have a real-time component I would suggest having that apply only outside of combat and use N-turns inside of combat. Using the two together as a single "time" component would make more sense. Turns are essentially an abstraction of time so that the player can make more thought-out decisions.
    $endgroup$
    – Shelby115
    Apr 19 at 18:34






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    "It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun." If they aren't playing the game, it's probably because they don't think it's fun. If players don't like your design concept, consider changing the concept?
    $endgroup$
    – Tim Holt
    Apr 19 at 20:39












  • $begingroup$
    Is there any particular reason why the disincentives are linear? For instance, instead of limiting it to every X, do your systems support things like X+N where N is the # of times used thus far?
    $endgroup$
    – Pikalek
    Apr 20 at 2:51










  • $begingroup$
    @Pikalek that's an interesting idea. I'll play around with that.
    $endgroup$
    – Jared Smith
    Apr 20 at 12:44














15












15








15


5



$begingroup$


I'm working on a turn-based RPG with classes. I want one of the spellcaster classes to have standard magic points, but another to have abilities with time limitations, one or more of




  • Use ability every N minutes of real time

  • Use ability every N turns of combat

  • Use ability once or N times per day (sleep to restore, or wait out day-night cycle)


There would be restorative items that could restore your "charge". These abilities would be more powerful than regular spells but constrained. This spellcasting class is a burster: gives you big hits but infrequently because of the limitations. The party carries them along as baggage until they get in a jam or run into a boss, then unleashes the hammer. I like it as an option to add depth, and it has interesting speedrun possibilities.



The last one is easy enough to balance if the party has to trek back to town and sleep to recharge, but I have a day-night cycle. Here are the problems as I see it:



Real time / N times per day



Player can just wait. I can make the duration punishing, but then it greatly reduces the utility. It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun.



Every N turns in combat



Player can just have every character defend/heal every round until the burster unleashes another round of big damage. I actually want this to be viable, but I don't want it to become the obviously best strategy for battles. So far it doesn't seem to be a huge issue as the caster just cycles through lesser powers until the big bang recharges. It's rough in the early game, but that's part of the balancing. The problem is that I'm having trouble getting it to be not so OP'd as to be obviously the best while still remaining good enough to be useful.



Any suggestion on how to balance these mechanics to mitigate camping/turtling?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




I'm working on a turn-based RPG with classes. I want one of the spellcaster classes to have standard magic points, but another to have abilities with time limitations, one or more of




  • Use ability every N minutes of real time

  • Use ability every N turns of combat

  • Use ability once or N times per day (sleep to restore, or wait out day-night cycle)


There would be restorative items that could restore your "charge". These abilities would be more powerful than regular spells but constrained. This spellcasting class is a burster: gives you big hits but infrequently because of the limitations. The party carries them along as baggage until they get in a jam or run into a boss, then unleashes the hammer. I like it as an option to add depth, and it has interesting speedrun possibilities.



The last one is easy enough to balance if the party has to trek back to town and sleep to recharge, but I have a day-night cycle. Here are the problems as I see it:



Real time / N times per day



Player can just wait. I can make the duration punishing, but then it greatly reduces the utility. It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun.



Every N turns in combat



Player can just have every character defend/heal every round until the burster unleashes another round of big damage. I actually want this to be viable, but I don't want it to become the obviously best strategy for battles. So far it doesn't seem to be a huge issue as the caster just cycles through lesser powers until the big bang recharges. It's rough in the early game, but that's part of the balancing. The problem is that I'm having trouble getting it to be not so OP'd as to be obviously the best while still remaining good enough to be useful.



Any suggestion on how to balance these mechanics to mitigate camping/turtling?







game-design game-mechanics rpg






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Apr 19 at 15:40









DMGregory

66.8k16119184




66.8k16119184










asked Apr 19 at 14:45









Jared SmithJared Smith

241310




241310








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    "just have every character defend/heal every round until ..." - if this is the optimal strategy, this would be a cross-character balancing issue more than an issue with a single character. This would mean that the offensive capability of one character is just way too good compared to all the others, or defensive abilities are, in general, much more powerful than offensive ones.
    $endgroup$
    – Dukeling
    Apr 19 at 17:30








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    If you're going to have a real-time component I would suggest having that apply only outside of combat and use N-turns inside of combat. Using the two together as a single "time" component would make more sense. Turns are essentially an abstraction of time so that the player can make more thought-out decisions.
    $endgroup$
    – Shelby115
    Apr 19 at 18:34






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    "It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun." If they aren't playing the game, it's probably because they don't think it's fun. If players don't like your design concept, consider changing the concept?
    $endgroup$
    – Tim Holt
    Apr 19 at 20:39












  • $begingroup$
    Is there any particular reason why the disincentives are linear? For instance, instead of limiting it to every X, do your systems support things like X+N where N is the # of times used thus far?
    $endgroup$
    – Pikalek
    Apr 20 at 2:51










  • $begingroup$
    @Pikalek that's an interesting idea. I'll play around with that.
    $endgroup$
    – Jared Smith
    Apr 20 at 12:44














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    "just have every character defend/heal every round until ..." - if this is the optimal strategy, this would be a cross-character balancing issue more than an issue with a single character. This would mean that the offensive capability of one character is just way too good compared to all the others, or defensive abilities are, in general, much more powerful than offensive ones.
    $endgroup$
    – Dukeling
    Apr 19 at 17:30








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    If you're going to have a real-time component I would suggest having that apply only outside of combat and use N-turns inside of combat. Using the two together as a single "time" component would make more sense. Turns are essentially an abstraction of time so that the player can make more thought-out decisions.
    $endgroup$
    – Shelby115
    Apr 19 at 18:34






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    "It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun." If they aren't playing the game, it's probably because they don't think it's fun. If players don't like your design concept, consider changing the concept?
    $endgroup$
    – Tim Holt
    Apr 19 at 20:39












  • $begingroup$
    Is there any particular reason why the disincentives are linear? For instance, instead of limiting it to every X, do your systems support things like X+N where N is the # of times used thus far?
    $endgroup$
    – Pikalek
    Apr 20 at 2:51










  • $begingroup$
    @Pikalek that's an interesting idea. I'll play around with that.
    $endgroup$
    – Jared Smith
    Apr 20 at 12:44








1




1




$begingroup$
"just have every character defend/heal every round until ..." - if this is the optimal strategy, this would be a cross-character balancing issue more than an issue with a single character. This would mean that the offensive capability of one character is just way too good compared to all the others, or defensive abilities are, in general, much more powerful than offensive ones.
$endgroup$
– Dukeling
Apr 19 at 17:30






$begingroup$
"just have every character defend/heal every round until ..." - if this is the optimal strategy, this would be a cross-character balancing issue more than an issue with a single character. This would mean that the offensive capability of one character is just way too good compared to all the others, or defensive abilities are, in general, much more powerful than offensive ones.
$endgroup$
– Dukeling
Apr 19 at 17:30






4




4




$begingroup$
If you're going to have a real-time component I would suggest having that apply only outside of combat and use N-turns inside of combat. Using the two together as a single "time" component would make more sense. Turns are essentially an abstraction of time so that the player can make more thought-out decisions.
$endgroup$
– Shelby115
Apr 19 at 18:34




$begingroup$
If you're going to have a real-time component I would suggest having that apply only outside of combat and use N-turns inside of combat. Using the two together as a single "time" component would make more sense. Turns are essentially an abstraction of time so that the player can make more thought-out decisions.
$endgroup$
– Shelby115
Apr 19 at 18:34




3




3




$begingroup$
"It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun." If they aren't playing the game, it's probably because they don't think it's fun. If players don't like your design concept, consider changing the concept?
$endgroup$
– Tim Holt
Apr 19 at 20:39






$begingroup$
"It also means that the player is not playing the game, this is after all supposed to be about entertainment. No fun." If they aren't playing the game, it's probably because they don't think it's fun. If players don't like your design concept, consider changing the concept?
$endgroup$
– Tim Holt
Apr 19 at 20:39














$begingroup$
Is there any particular reason why the disincentives are linear? For instance, instead of limiting it to every X, do your systems support things like X+N where N is the # of times used thus far?
$endgroup$
– Pikalek
Apr 20 at 2:51




$begingroup$
Is there any particular reason why the disincentives are linear? For instance, instead of limiting it to every X, do your systems support things like X+N where N is the # of times used thus far?
$endgroup$
– Pikalek
Apr 20 at 2:51












$begingroup$
@Pikalek that's an interesting idea. I'll play around with that.
$endgroup$
– Jared Smith
Apr 20 at 12:44




$begingroup$
@Pikalek that's an interesting idea. I'll play around with that.
$endgroup$
– Jared Smith
Apr 20 at 12:44










8 Answers
8






active

oldest

votes


















26












$begingroup$

The reason turtling is attractive in this case is because there's no or little incentive to do anything risky during the character's downtime. It's not risk-reward, it's wait-reward. To counter this, you have to incentivize risk. The periods of burst should be buffered with active preparation for their next explosive turn.



There's plenty of ways to do this, but the ones that come to mind are:



Resource generation



Your character's burst spells could require a resource that is generated by casting weaker spells. If the character doesn't cast these spells, the resource either generates very slowly or not at all. You could even have a few variants of these resource generation spells that have different risk-reward ratios.



Preparation spells



Have "mark" spells that do minimal damage, but are consumed for big damage when your burst spell goes off. Your mage could stack these marks on the target and then trigger it, or navigate around the map applying them before nuking all the targets at once. The big spell wouldn't even need a cooldown in this case, as it would be a wet noodle unless the potency has been amplified by marks.



Positioning spells



Maybe your mage does damage in an area of effect, and has displacement spells that do minimal damage. The rest of the team, as well as the mage, could focus their efforts into clumping the enemy so that the burst is more effective. I think this one is the most fun with your resource regeneration items, as the mage could use those to deal heavy damage multiple times before the enemy has a chance to scatter.





As others have mentioned, an alternative or addition to rewarding active play is discouraging passive play. This is less specific to the burst mage character and more about turtling in general. My favorites from other answers are:



Short fights give better rewards



DrakaSAN suggested decaying rewards for a won fight. You specifically asked that the turtle strategy be viable but not optimal, so perhaps the reward isn't so punishing that it makes future encounters harder (no XP reduction), but maybe something that doesn't actually impact gameplay, like some additional dialog after the fight or an achievement if the encounter is beaten in less than X turns.



The game doesn't just wait for you



Dronz suggested keeping the game in motion while you wait. This is my favorite, as it allows you do sprinkle lore where turn-based RPGs usually lack it. If you never showed up, the villains would just continue their villainy. If you plan on sitting in a corner, then they may as well stick to their plans as well. BBEG can keep arming his doomsday device, his battle droid factory can keep making more battle droids, and he can polish off that potion of buffing. It'd be neat if these outcomes changed the story of the game in some way.



The time crunch doesn't have to be lore related either. The arena can be flooding with water, the volcano can be close to eruption, the encroaching circle of battle royale can be creeping in, etc.



The enemies also like breaks



Dronz also suggested letting the enemy enjoy cooldown time. This means your fights take MUCH longer if you just wait around, or you have a harder time winning because the NPCs have shorter cooldowns and a bigger inventory of items.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    "Mark" spells is what makes playing the Apprentice in Dungeon Defenders 2 so satisfying. Unfortunately for other reasons everything else about his kit is pretty crap. Namely its hard to mark your maximum number of targets and two, your other two abilities don't interact with marking at all.
    $endgroup$
    – Draco18s
    Apr 20 at 3:32










  • $begingroup$
    that's the reason I think for which certain classes in diablo III can recharge only when fighting. Never thought to that. Interesting
    $endgroup$
    – GameDeveloper
    Apr 20 at 11:10



















5












$begingroup$

Use ability every N minutes of real time



Since it is a turn-based game, the player can just wait for the ability to be available again.



Use ability once or N times per day (sleep to restore, or wait out day-night cycle)



This works well in the The Elder Scrolls serie because you cannot rest if ennemies are nearby. Meaning, if you are in a dungeon for example, you can probably only use it once for the entire dungeon (not saying it cannot be abused, of course).



If you plan to implement this in a turn-based game, just make sure that the player cannot rest whenever, which would make negate the interest of the reloading time.



Use ability every N turns of combat



In most game, there are often mechanics tied to resource management. For example, your more classical mana-using mage have to manage its mana pool, so he has to make choices about what spell to use. This is interesting for the player.



Your "Use ability every N turns of combat" mage however, doens't have to make those choices, since each spell use its own resource, so to speak. Therefore, the only question the player has to ask himself is "should I keep this spell for later in the fight or use it right now?" (since I assume every cooldown is reset when the fight is over).



I believe this is a less interesting choice, because for example, if you decide to heal an ally for 50 HP when he has 50/100 HP left or 10/100 HP left does not make a difference on the result of the fight.



You mentioned items to restore the cooldown of the spells. They are analogous to mana potions in this case. Therefore, I don't think it solves the issue of your cooldown-based mage being less interesting than a mana-based mage.



Side note



Have you played pen and paper RPG already? Most of the times, those games include spellcaster classes with different resources mechanics. Take a look at Pathfinder classes for example, maybe this could be interesting?






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    In terms of decision making, I'm thinking more that it's ok that this class is OP in the late game (can open fights for big damage then spam lower tier) because you have to carry them as deadweight through most of the game as they conserve their abilities for bosses until they have enough powers. I made the restorative items rarer and more expensive than the ones for regular mp. And no, the counter doesn't reset after battles are over: n turns of combat is n turns of combat. It does reset after sleeping. I'll have to look at pen and paper, I've never played them.
    $endgroup$
    – Jared Smith
    Apr 19 at 15:46












  • $begingroup$
    Can the player chose to include or not this class in its party, or is it a mandatory character?
    $endgroup$
    – Eldy
    Apr 19 at 17:40










  • $begingroup$
    It's a choice: classes are picked at the start of the game. Players could take a party of 4 of them (early game would be super difficult, endgame would be easy).
    $endgroup$
    – Jared Smith
    Apr 19 at 17:41





















3












$begingroup$

If you make your game a dynamic game world, where things happen as time progresses, and adversary positions, actions, and their own "recharging" effects are also tracked, then you can get a game with natural trade-off consequences from resting without doing anything, because it costs:




  • opportunities to take action before the situation changes will be lost if/while the player(s) do nothing but rest


  • adversaries can be taking actions the players don't want to happen, while they rest, and other events can happen in the game world


  • adversaries can be resting wounds and recharging their own abilities while the players recharge theirs







share|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Perfect! I just have to give enemies the same abilities. Now why didn't I think of that :P
    $endgroup$
    – Jared Smith
    Apr 20 at 13:01






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JaredSmith Too much exposure to all the static game designs out there? ;-)
    $endgroup$
    – Dronz
    Apr 20 at 20:38



















2












$begingroup$

As Wazpoodle noticed, the problem is mainly that defending for a long time do not have any other drawback than time.



All the propositions revolve around giving the player other things to do during the waiting time, but in combination to those, you may also privilege fights that end quickly.



For example, a fight that is finished in the first 3 turn may give a additional bonus (XP, money...), that degrade slowly over the duration of the combat.



If the player want to turtle, he will receive a reduced / no bonus.



This would incentivize this class (the burst attack may be enough to end the combat on the first turn), while also pushing the player to act now and make do if the burst is not enough.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    That time incentive for winning quickly is a good idea. I'm going to have to play around with that.
    $endgroup$
    – Jared Smith
    Apr 20 at 13:00



















2












$begingroup$

A very useful way to think of balancing combat is that you have exactly one goal:




Reduce the damage done to the party




"Heal" is the most obvious way of achieving that goal: it simply erases the damage done.



"Defend" is another direct means of doing so, via diminishing the effectiveness of enemy attacks.



"Attack" is also a means of reducing the damage done to the party: if a player does enough damage to an enemy so that it dies one turn sooner, then that player has achieved the effect of sparing the party from an entire turn's worth of damage.



If you don't want it to be optimal for players to usually choose "defend" rather than "attack", then the trick is to adjust the numbers so that attacking saves more damage than defending does. I think the best way to do this is to look at the figures




  • Determine what percentage of a turn's worth of damage the player mitigates by choosing "defend". Take care to account properly: for example, if "defend" only reduces the damage that specific player takes, then choosing that action only has any effect on those turns when that player gets attacked.

  • Estimate the entire party's average rate of damage per turn, and compare that to the amount of damage the player can do by choosing "attack". This should let you measure, in turns, how much faster combat will end by making that choice.




Note that to get the effect you want to achieve, you probably need the average damage per turn your "burster" class does to be rather low.



This means that you will have to design encounters so that the timing of damage is a valuable thing. For example, if an encounter has three identical enemies, damage done near the beginning of a fight is three times more valuable than damage done near the end of a fight — the former reduces the amount of time you spend with all three enemies damaging you, whereas the latter only reduces the amount of time you spend with a single enemy damaging you.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    2












    $begingroup$

    Fundamentally, the options are to make the undesired player behavior less attractive, to make desired alternatives more attractive, or some combination of the two.



    In terms of implementation, it might be worth considering non-linear solutions. You've already identified some disincentives, but I noticed that they all happen to be linear. For instance, limiting an ability to once every X time units. An example of a non-linear approach would be to use a limit of X+N where N is the number of times used thus far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is good, some is fine, but increasingly less so". In terms of theme, this maps on to the idea of diminishing returns.



    You can also include more complex formulas. For instance, instead of a strictly increasing value for N, you could include a formula allowing it to gradually ease back over time. Or you could make it more aggressive, 1.5*N, 3*N, N^2, etc.



    While this can give you extra flexibility to your design, there are some trade-offs to consider:




    • it creates more parameters to balance

    • it can create more obvious 'sweet spots' leading to more average play strategies


      • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider if it detracts from the experience




    Non-linearity can also be applied to incentives. For instance, one of the Ascension deck builder expansions has a enemy with a reward of X+N where N is the number of times this enemy has been defeated so far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is okay, more is better & increasingly so". In terms of theme, this maps onto the idea of compounded returns, reaping rewards for early investment.



    Again, you can use more complex formulas. A common variant is to include a cap, for instance a reward of X+min(N,C) where N is the number of times, C is the cap and the min function gives you the smaller of the two.



    As before, there are some trade-offs:




    • it creates more parameters to balance

    • it can create run away leader (aka snowball) effects leading to more extreme, all-in play strategies


      • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider how it impacts the design








    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$





















      1












      $begingroup$

      A potential solution could have the burst damage be enabled by other skills, such as debuffs, self buffs, and the like. In MMOs this is called a rotation - it's been awhile, but IIRC WoW has a good example with the fire warlock, who has a spell that does a ton of damage, but with limited CDs and a bunch of pre-requisites for getting the most out of the spell.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$





















        1












        $begingroup$

        How about making the abilities recharge from enemy kills? If there's a boss every, say, 10 enemies, and each kill recharges 10% of the power needed, the optimal strategy is, indeed, to use your other abilities to take out the normal enemies, then fire the big guns at the boss.



        Path of Exile uses this structure for both flasks (which instantly recharge in town) and Vaal skills (which only recharge in battle).



        If you're dead-set on having this be time/turn based, then you need a mechanism in place that punishes taking a long time. For example, enemy monsters can have the same mechanics; if you take too long killing them, they start unleashing dangerous moves. Or reward taking a short time; you get bonus xp or resources if you can quickly kill the enemies.






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$














          Your Answer






          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          });
          });
          }, "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "53"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgamedev.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f170164%2fhow-can-i-prevent-balance-waiting-and-turtling-as-a-response-to-cooldown-mechani%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          8 Answers
          8






          active

          oldest

          votes








          8 Answers
          8






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          26












          $begingroup$

          The reason turtling is attractive in this case is because there's no or little incentive to do anything risky during the character's downtime. It's not risk-reward, it's wait-reward. To counter this, you have to incentivize risk. The periods of burst should be buffered with active preparation for their next explosive turn.



          There's plenty of ways to do this, but the ones that come to mind are:



          Resource generation



          Your character's burst spells could require a resource that is generated by casting weaker spells. If the character doesn't cast these spells, the resource either generates very slowly or not at all. You could even have a few variants of these resource generation spells that have different risk-reward ratios.



          Preparation spells



          Have "mark" spells that do minimal damage, but are consumed for big damage when your burst spell goes off. Your mage could stack these marks on the target and then trigger it, or navigate around the map applying them before nuking all the targets at once. The big spell wouldn't even need a cooldown in this case, as it would be a wet noodle unless the potency has been amplified by marks.



          Positioning spells



          Maybe your mage does damage in an area of effect, and has displacement spells that do minimal damage. The rest of the team, as well as the mage, could focus their efforts into clumping the enemy so that the burst is more effective. I think this one is the most fun with your resource regeneration items, as the mage could use those to deal heavy damage multiple times before the enemy has a chance to scatter.





          As others have mentioned, an alternative or addition to rewarding active play is discouraging passive play. This is less specific to the burst mage character and more about turtling in general. My favorites from other answers are:



          Short fights give better rewards



          DrakaSAN suggested decaying rewards for a won fight. You specifically asked that the turtle strategy be viable but not optimal, so perhaps the reward isn't so punishing that it makes future encounters harder (no XP reduction), but maybe something that doesn't actually impact gameplay, like some additional dialog after the fight or an achievement if the encounter is beaten in less than X turns.



          The game doesn't just wait for you



          Dronz suggested keeping the game in motion while you wait. This is my favorite, as it allows you do sprinkle lore where turn-based RPGs usually lack it. If you never showed up, the villains would just continue their villainy. If you plan on sitting in a corner, then they may as well stick to their plans as well. BBEG can keep arming his doomsday device, his battle droid factory can keep making more battle droids, and he can polish off that potion of buffing. It'd be neat if these outcomes changed the story of the game in some way.



          The time crunch doesn't have to be lore related either. The arena can be flooding with water, the volcano can be close to eruption, the encroaching circle of battle royale can be creeping in, etc.



          The enemies also like breaks



          Dronz also suggested letting the enemy enjoy cooldown time. This means your fights take MUCH longer if you just wait around, or you have a harder time winning because the NPCs have shorter cooldowns and a bigger inventory of items.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            "Mark" spells is what makes playing the Apprentice in Dungeon Defenders 2 so satisfying. Unfortunately for other reasons everything else about his kit is pretty crap. Namely its hard to mark your maximum number of targets and two, your other two abilities don't interact with marking at all.
            $endgroup$
            – Draco18s
            Apr 20 at 3:32










          • $begingroup$
            that's the reason I think for which certain classes in diablo III can recharge only when fighting. Never thought to that. Interesting
            $endgroup$
            – GameDeveloper
            Apr 20 at 11:10
















          26












          $begingroup$

          The reason turtling is attractive in this case is because there's no or little incentive to do anything risky during the character's downtime. It's not risk-reward, it's wait-reward. To counter this, you have to incentivize risk. The periods of burst should be buffered with active preparation for their next explosive turn.



          There's plenty of ways to do this, but the ones that come to mind are:



          Resource generation



          Your character's burst spells could require a resource that is generated by casting weaker spells. If the character doesn't cast these spells, the resource either generates very slowly or not at all. You could even have a few variants of these resource generation spells that have different risk-reward ratios.



          Preparation spells



          Have "mark" spells that do minimal damage, but are consumed for big damage when your burst spell goes off. Your mage could stack these marks on the target and then trigger it, or navigate around the map applying them before nuking all the targets at once. The big spell wouldn't even need a cooldown in this case, as it would be a wet noodle unless the potency has been amplified by marks.



          Positioning spells



          Maybe your mage does damage in an area of effect, and has displacement spells that do minimal damage. The rest of the team, as well as the mage, could focus their efforts into clumping the enemy so that the burst is more effective. I think this one is the most fun with your resource regeneration items, as the mage could use those to deal heavy damage multiple times before the enemy has a chance to scatter.





          As others have mentioned, an alternative or addition to rewarding active play is discouraging passive play. This is less specific to the burst mage character and more about turtling in general. My favorites from other answers are:



          Short fights give better rewards



          DrakaSAN suggested decaying rewards for a won fight. You specifically asked that the turtle strategy be viable but not optimal, so perhaps the reward isn't so punishing that it makes future encounters harder (no XP reduction), but maybe something that doesn't actually impact gameplay, like some additional dialog after the fight or an achievement if the encounter is beaten in less than X turns.



          The game doesn't just wait for you



          Dronz suggested keeping the game in motion while you wait. This is my favorite, as it allows you do sprinkle lore where turn-based RPGs usually lack it. If you never showed up, the villains would just continue their villainy. If you plan on sitting in a corner, then they may as well stick to their plans as well. BBEG can keep arming his doomsday device, his battle droid factory can keep making more battle droids, and he can polish off that potion of buffing. It'd be neat if these outcomes changed the story of the game in some way.



          The time crunch doesn't have to be lore related either. The arena can be flooding with water, the volcano can be close to eruption, the encroaching circle of battle royale can be creeping in, etc.



          The enemies also like breaks



          Dronz also suggested letting the enemy enjoy cooldown time. This means your fights take MUCH longer if you just wait around, or you have a harder time winning because the NPCs have shorter cooldowns and a bigger inventory of items.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            "Mark" spells is what makes playing the Apprentice in Dungeon Defenders 2 so satisfying. Unfortunately for other reasons everything else about his kit is pretty crap. Namely its hard to mark your maximum number of targets and two, your other two abilities don't interact with marking at all.
            $endgroup$
            – Draco18s
            Apr 20 at 3:32










          • $begingroup$
            that's the reason I think for which certain classes in diablo III can recharge only when fighting. Never thought to that. Interesting
            $endgroup$
            – GameDeveloper
            Apr 20 at 11:10














          26












          26








          26





          $begingroup$

          The reason turtling is attractive in this case is because there's no or little incentive to do anything risky during the character's downtime. It's not risk-reward, it's wait-reward. To counter this, you have to incentivize risk. The periods of burst should be buffered with active preparation for their next explosive turn.



          There's plenty of ways to do this, but the ones that come to mind are:



          Resource generation



          Your character's burst spells could require a resource that is generated by casting weaker spells. If the character doesn't cast these spells, the resource either generates very slowly or not at all. You could even have a few variants of these resource generation spells that have different risk-reward ratios.



          Preparation spells



          Have "mark" spells that do minimal damage, but are consumed for big damage when your burst spell goes off. Your mage could stack these marks on the target and then trigger it, or navigate around the map applying them before nuking all the targets at once. The big spell wouldn't even need a cooldown in this case, as it would be a wet noodle unless the potency has been amplified by marks.



          Positioning spells



          Maybe your mage does damage in an area of effect, and has displacement spells that do minimal damage. The rest of the team, as well as the mage, could focus their efforts into clumping the enemy so that the burst is more effective. I think this one is the most fun with your resource regeneration items, as the mage could use those to deal heavy damage multiple times before the enemy has a chance to scatter.





          As others have mentioned, an alternative or addition to rewarding active play is discouraging passive play. This is less specific to the burst mage character and more about turtling in general. My favorites from other answers are:



          Short fights give better rewards



          DrakaSAN suggested decaying rewards for a won fight. You specifically asked that the turtle strategy be viable but not optimal, so perhaps the reward isn't so punishing that it makes future encounters harder (no XP reduction), but maybe something that doesn't actually impact gameplay, like some additional dialog after the fight or an achievement if the encounter is beaten in less than X turns.



          The game doesn't just wait for you



          Dronz suggested keeping the game in motion while you wait. This is my favorite, as it allows you do sprinkle lore where turn-based RPGs usually lack it. If you never showed up, the villains would just continue their villainy. If you plan on sitting in a corner, then they may as well stick to their plans as well. BBEG can keep arming his doomsday device, his battle droid factory can keep making more battle droids, and he can polish off that potion of buffing. It'd be neat if these outcomes changed the story of the game in some way.



          The time crunch doesn't have to be lore related either. The arena can be flooding with water, the volcano can be close to eruption, the encroaching circle of battle royale can be creeping in, etc.



          The enemies also like breaks



          Dronz also suggested letting the enemy enjoy cooldown time. This means your fights take MUCH longer if you just wait around, or you have a harder time winning because the NPCs have shorter cooldowns and a bigger inventory of items.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          The reason turtling is attractive in this case is because there's no or little incentive to do anything risky during the character's downtime. It's not risk-reward, it's wait-reward. To counter this, you have to incentivize risk. The periods of burst should be buffered with active preparation for their next explosive turn.



          There's plenty of ways to do this, but the ones that come to mind are:



          Resource generation



          Your character's burst spells could require a resource that is generated by casting weaker spells. If the character doesn't cast these spells, the resource either generates very slowly or not at all. You could even have a few variants of these resource generation spells that have different risk-reward ratios.



          Preparation spells



          Have "mark" spells that do minimal damage, but are consumed for big damage when your burst spell goes off. Your mage could stack these marks on the target and then trigger it, or navigate around the map applying them before nuking all the targets at once. The big spell wouldn't even need a cooldown in this case, as it would be a wet noodle unless the potency has been amplified by marks.



          Positioning spells



          Maybe your mage does damage in an area of effect, and has displacement spells that do minimal damage. The rest of the team, as well as the mage, could focus their efforts into clumping the enemy so that the burst is more effective. I think this one is the most fun with your resource regeneration items, as the mage could use those to deal heavy damage multiple times before the enemy has a chance to scatter.





          As others have mentioned, an alternative or addition to rewarding active play is discouraging passive play. This is less specific to the burst mage character and more about turtling in general. My favorites from other answers are:



          Short fights give better rewards



          DrakaSAN suggested decaying rewards for a won fight. You specifically asked that the turtle strategy be viable but not optimal, so perhaps the reward isn't so punishing that it makes future encounters harder (no XP reduction), but maybe something that doesn't actually impact gameplay, like some additional dialog after the fight or an achievement if the encounter is beaten in less than X turns.



          The game doesn't just wait for you



          Dronz suggested keeping the game in motion while you wait. This is my favorite, as it allows you do sprinkle lore where turn-based RPGs usually lack it. If you never showed up, the villains would just continue their villainy. If you plan on sitting in a corner, then they may as well stick to their plans as well. BBEG can keep arming his doomsday device, his battle droid factory can keep making more battle droids, and he can polish off that potion of buffing. It'd be neat if these outcomes changed the story of the game in some way.



          The time crunch doesn't have to be lore related either. The arena can be flooding with water, the volcano can be close to eruption, the encroaching circle of battle royale can be creeping in, etc.



          The enemies also like breaks



          Dronz also suggested letting the enemy enjoy cooldown time. This means your fights take MUCH longer if you just wait around, or you have a harder time winning because the NPCs have shorter cooldowns and a bigger inventory of items.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Apr 22 at 15:33

























          answered Apr 19 at 18:32









          WazoopleWazoople

          37614




          37614












          • $begingroup$
            "Mark" spells is what makes playing the Apprentice in Dungeon Defenders 2 so satisfying. Unfortunately for other reasons everything else about his kit is pretty crap. Namely its hard to mark your maximum number of targets and two, your other two abilities don't interact with marking at all.
            $endgroup$
            – Draco18s
            Apr 20 at 3:32










          • $begingroup$
            that's the reason I think for which certain classes in diablo III can recharge only when fighting. Never thought to that. Interesting
            $endgroup$
            – GameDeveloper
            Apr 20 at 11:10


















          • $begingroup$
            "Mark" spells is what makes playing the Apprentice in Dungeon Defenders 2 so satisfying. Unfortunately for other reasons everything else about his kit is pretty crap. Namely its hard to mark your maximum number of targets and two, your other two abilities don't interact with marking at all.
            $endgroup$
            – Draco18s
            Apr 20 at 3:32










          • $begingroup$
            that's the reason I think for which certain classes in diablo III can recharge only when fighting. Never thought to that. Interesting
            $endgroup$
            – GameDeveloper
            Apr 20 at 11:10
















          $begingroup$
          "Mark" spells is what makes playing the Apprentice in Dungeon Defenders 2 so satisfying. Unfortunately for other reasons everything else about his kit is pretty crap. Namely its hard to mark your maximum number of targets and two, your other two abilities don't interact with marking at all.
          $endgroup$
          – Draco18s
          Apr 20 at 3:32




          $begingroup$
          "Mark" spells is what makes playing the Apprentice in Dungeon Defenders 2 so satisfying. Unfortunately for other reasons everything else about his kit is pretty crap. Namely its hard to mark your maximum number of targets and two, your other two abilities don't interact with marking at all.
          $endgroup$
          – Draco18s
          Apr 20 at 3:32












          $begingroup$
          that's the reason I think for which certain classes in diablo III can recharge only when fighting. Never thought to that. Interesting
          $endgroup$
          – GameDeveloper
          Apr 20 at 11:10




          $begingroup$
          that's the reason I think for which certain classes in diablo III can recharge only when fighting. Never thought to that. Interesting
          $endgroup$
          – GameDeveloper
          Apr 20 at 11:10













          5












          $begingroup$

          Use ability every N minutes of real time



          Since it is a turn-based game, the player can just wait for the ability to be available again.



          Use ability once or N times per day (sleep to restore, or wait out day-night cycle)



          This works well in the The Elder Scrolls serie because you cannot rest if ennemies are nearby. Meaning, if you are in a dungeon for example, you can probably only use it once for the entire dungeon (not saying it cannot be abused, of course).



          If you plan to implement this in a turn-based game, just make sure that the player cannot rest whenever, which would make negate the interest of the reloading time.



          Use ability every N turns of combat



          In most game, there are often mechanics tied to resource management. For example, your more classical mana-using mage have to manage its mana pool, so he has to make choices about what spell to use. This is interesting for the player.



          Your "Use ability every N turns of combat" mage however, doens't have to make those choices, since each spell use its own resource, so to speak. Therefore, the only question the player has to ask himself is "should I keep this spell for later in the fight or use it right now?" (since I assume every cooldown is reset when the fight is over).



          I believe this is a less interesting choice, because for example, if you decide to heal an ally for 50 HP when he has 50/100 HP left or 10/100 HP left does not make a difference on the result of the fight.



          You mentioned items to restore the cooldown of the spells. They are analogous to mana potions in this case. Therefore, I don't think it solves the issue of your cooldown-based mage being less interesting than a mana-based mage.



          Side note



          Have you played pen and paper RPG already? Most of the times, those games include spellcaster classes with different resources mechanics. Take a look at Pathfinder classes for example, maybe this could be interesting?






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            In terms of decision making, I'm thinking more that it's ok that this class is OP in the late game (can open fights for big damage then spam lower tier) because you have to carry them as deadweight through most of the game as they conserve their abilities for bosses until they have enough powers. I made the restorative items rarer and more expensive than the ones for regular mp. And no, the counter doesn't reset after battles are over: n turns of combat is n turns of combat. It does reset after sleeping. I'll have to look at pen and paper, I've never played them.
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 19 at 15:46












          • $begingroup$
            Can the player chose to include or not this class in its party, or is it a mandatory character?
            $endgroup$
            – Eldy
            Apr 19 at 17:40










          • $begingroup$
            It's a choice: classes are picked at the start of the game. Players could take a party of 4 of them (early game would be super difficult, endgame would be easy).
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 19 at 17:41


















          5












          $begingroup$

          Use ability every N minutes of real time



          Since it is a turn-based game, the player can just wait for the ability to be available again.



          Use ability once or N times per day (sleep to restore, or wait out day-night cycle)



          This works well in the The Elder Scrolls serie because you cannot rest if ennemies are nearby. Meaning, if you are in a dungeon for example, you can probably only use it once for the entire dungeon (not saying it cannot be abused, of course).



          If you plan to implement this in a turn-based game, just make sure that the player cannot rest whenever, which would make negate the interest of the reloading time.



          Use ability every N turns of combat



          In most game, there are often mechanics tied to resource management. For example, your more classical mana-using mage have to manage its mana pool, so he has to make choices about what spell to use. This is interesting for the player.



          Your "Use ability every N turns of combat" mage however, doens't have to make those choices, since each spell use its own resource, so to speak. Therefore, the only question the player has to ask himself is "should I keep this spell for later in the fight or use it right now?" (since I assume every cooldown is reset when the fight is over).



          I believe this is a less interesting choice, because for example, if you decide to heal an ally for 50 HP when he has 50/100 HP left or 10/100 HP left does not make a difference on the result of the fight.



          You mentioned items to restore the cooldown of the spells. They are analogous to mana potions in this case. Therefore, I don't think it solves the issue of your cooldown-based mage being less interesting than a mana-based mage.



          Side note



          Have you played pen and paper RPG already? Most of the times, those games include spellcaster classes with different resources mechanics. Take a look at Pathfinder classes for example, maybe this could be interesting?






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            In terms of decision making, I'm thinking more that it's ok that this class is OP in the late game (can open fights for big damage then spam lower tier) because you have to carry them as deadweight through most of the game as they conserve their abilities for bosses until they have enough powers. I made the restorative items rarer and more expensive than the ones for regular mp. And no, the counter doesn't reset after battles are over: n turns of combat is n turns of combat. It does reset after sleeping. I'll have to look at pen and paper, I've never played them.
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 19 at 15:46












          • $begingroup$
            Can the player chose to include or not this class in its party, or is it a mandatory character?
            $endgroup$
            – Eldy
            Apr 19 at 17:40










          • $begingroup$
            It's a choice: classes are picked at the start of the game. Players could take a party of 4 of them (early game would be super difficult, endgame would be easy).
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 19 at 17:41
















          5












          5








          5





          $begingroup$

          Use ability every N minutes of real time



          Since it is a turn-based game, the player can just wait for the ability to be available again.



          Use ability once or N times per day (sleep to restore, or wait out day-night cycle)



          This works well in the The Elder Scrolls serie because you cannot rest if ennemies are nearby. Meaning, if you are in a dungeon for example, you can probably only use it once for the entire dungeon (not saying it cannot be abused, of course).



          If you plan to implement this in a turn-based game, just make sure that the player cannot rest whenever, which would make negate the interest of the reloading time.



          Use ability every N turns of combat



          In most game, there are often mechanics tied to resource management. For example, your more classical mana-using mage have to manage its mana pool, so he has to make choices about what spell to use. This is interesting for the player.



          Your "Use ability every N turns of combat" mage however, doens't have to make those choices, since each spell use its own resource, so to speak. Therefore, the only question the player has to ask himself is "should I keep this spell for later in the fight or use it right now?" (since I assume every cooldown is reset when the fight is over).



          I believe this is a less interesting choice, because for example, if you decide to heal an ally for 50 HP when he has 50/100 HP left or 10/100 HP left does not make a difference on the result of the fight.



          You mentioned items to restore the cooldown of the spells. They are analogous to mana potions in this case. Therefore, I don't think it solves the issue of your cooldown-based mage being less interesting than a mana-based mage.



          Side note



          Have you played pen and paper RPG already? Most of the times, those games include spellcaster classes with different resources mechanics. Take a look at Pathfinder classes for example, maybe this could be interesting?






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Use ability every N minutes of real time



          Since it is a turn-based game, the player can just wait for the ability to be available again.



          Use ability once or N times per day (sleep to restore, or wait out day-night cycle)



          This works well in the The Elder Scrolls serie because you cannot rest if ennemies are nearby. Meaning, if you are in a dungeon for example, you can probably only use it once for the entire dungeon (not saying it cannot be abused, of course).



          If you plan to implement this in a turn-based game, just make sure that the player cannot rest whenever, which would make negate the interest of the reloading time.



          Use ability every N turns of combat



          In most game, there are often mechanics tied to resource management. For example, your more classical mana-using mage have to manage its mana pool, so he has to make choices about what spell to use. This is interesting for the player.



          Your "Use ability every N turns of combat" mage however, doens't have to make those choices, since each spell use its own resource, so to speak. Therefore, the only question the player has to ask himself is "should I keep this spell for later in the fight or use it right now?" (since I assume every cooldown is reset when the fight is over).



          I believe this is a less interesting choice, because for example, if you decide to heal an ally for 50 HP when he has 50/100 HP left or 10/100 HP left does not make a difference on the result of the fight.



          You mentioned items to restore the cooldown of the spells. They are analogous to mana potions in this case. Therefore, I don't think it solves the issue of your cooldown-based mage being less interesting than a mana-based mage.



          Side note



          Have you played pen and paper RPG already? Most of the times, those games include spellcaster classes with different resources mechanics. Take a look at Pathfinder classes for example, maybe this could be interesting?







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Apr 19 at 15:29









          EldyEldy

          70829




          70829












          • $begingroup$
            In terms of decision making, I'm thinking more that it's ok that this class is OP in the late game (can open fights for big damage then spam lower tier) because you have to carry them as deadweight through most of the game as they conserve their abilities for bosses until they have enough powers. I made the restorative items rarer and more expensive than the ones for regular mp. And no, the counter doesn't reset after battles are over: n turns of combat is n turns of combat. It does reset after sleeping. I'll have to look at pen and paper, I've never played them.
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 19 at 15:46












          • $begingroup$
            Can the player chose to include or not this class in its party, or is it a mandatory character?
            $endgroup$
            – Eldy
            Apr 19 at 17:40










          • $begingroup$
            It's a choice: classes are picked at the start of the game. Players could take a party of 4 of them (early game would be super difficult, endgame would be easy).
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 19 at 17:41




















          • $begingroup$
            In terms of decision making, I'm thinking more that it's ok that this class is OP in the late game (can open fights for big damage then spam lower tier) because you have to carry them as deadweight through most of the game as they conserve their abilities for bosses until they have enough powers. I made the restorative items rarer and more expensive than the ones for regular mp. And no, the counter doesn't reset after battles are over: n turns of combat is n turns of combat. It does reset after sleeping. I'll have to look at pen and paper, I've never played them.
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 19 at 15:46












          • $begingroup$
            Can the player chose to include or not this class in its party, or is it a mandatory character?
            $endgroup$
            – Eldy
            Apr 19 at 17:40










          • $begingroup$
            It's a choice: classes are picked at the start of the game. Players could take a party of 4 of them (early game would be super difficult, endgame would be easy).
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 19 at 17:41


















          $begingroup$
          In terms of decision making, I'm thinking more that it's ok that this class is OP in the late game (can open fights for big damage then spam lower tier) because you have to carry them as deadweight through most of the game as they conserve their abilities for bosses until they have enough powers. I made the restorative items rarer and more expensive than the ones for regular mp. And no, the counter doesn't reset after battles are over: n turns of combat is n turns of combat. It does reset after sleeping. I'll have to look at pen and paper, I've never played them.
          $endgroup$
          – Jared Smith
          Apr 19 at 15:46






          $begingroup$
          In terms of decision making, I'm thinking more that it's ok that this class is OP in the late game (can open fights for big damage then spam lower tier) because you have to carry them as deadweight through most of the game as they conserve their abilities for bosses until they have enough powers. I made the restorative items rarer and more expensive than the ones for regular mp. And no, the counter doesn't reset after battles are over: n turns of combat is n turns of combat. It does reset after sleeping. I'll have to look at pen and paper, I've never played them.
          $endgroup$
          – Jared Smith
          Apr 19 at 15:46














          $begingroup$
          Can the player chose to include or not this class in its party, or is it a mandatory character?
          $endgroup$
          – Eldy
          Apr 19 at 17:40




          $begingroup$
          Can the player chose to include or not this class in its party, or is it a mandatory character?
          $endgroup$
          – Eldy
          Apr 19 at 17:40












          $begingroup$
          It's a choice: classes are picked at the start of the game. Players could take a party of 4 of them (early game would be super difficult, endgame would be easy).
          $endgroup$
          – Jared Smith
          Apr 19 at 17:41






          $begingroup$
          It's a choice: classes are picked at the start of the game. Players could take a party of 4 of them (early game would be super difficult, endgame would be easy).
          $endgroup$
          – Jared Smith
          Apr 19 at 17:41













          3












          $begingroup$

          If you make your game a dynamic game world, where things happen as time progresses, and adversary positions, actions, and their own "recharging" effects are also tracked, then you can get a game with natural trade-off consequences from resting without doing anything, because it costs:




          • opportunities to take action before the situation changes will be lost if/while the player(s) do nothing but rest


          • adversaries can be taking actions the players don't want to happen, while they rest, and other events can happen in the game world


          • adversaries can be resting wounds and recharging their own abilities while the players recharge theirs







          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Perfect! I just have to give enemies the same abilities. Now why didn't I think of that :P
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 20 at 13:01






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @JaredSmith Too much exposure to all the static game designs out there? ;-)
            $endgroup$
            – Dronz
            Apr 20 at 20:38
















          3












          $begingroup$

          If you make your game a dynamic game world, where things happen as time progresses, and adversary positions, actions, and their own "recharging" effects are also tracked, then you can get a game with natural trade-off consequences from resting without doing anything, because it costs:




          • opportunities to take action before the situation changes will be lost if/while the player(s) do nothing but rest


          • adversaries can be taking actions the players don't want to happen, while they rest, and other events can happen in the game world


          • adversaries can be resting wounds and recharging their own abilities while the players recharge theirs







          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Perfect! I just have to give enemies the same abilities. Now why didn't I think of that :P
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 20 at 13:01






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @JaredSmith Too much exposure to all the static game designs out there? ;-)
            $endgroup$
            – Dronz
            Apr 20 at 20:38














          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          If you make your game a dynamic game world, where things happen as time progresses, and adversary positions, actions, and their own "recharging" effects are also tracked, then you can get a game with natural trade-off consequences from resting without doing anything, because it costs:




          • opportunities to take action before the situation changes will be lost if/while the player(s) do nothing but rest


          • adversaries can be taking actions the players don't want to happen, while they rest, and other events can happen in the game world


          • adversaries can be resting wounds and recharging their own abilities while the players recharge theirs







          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          If you make your game a dynamic game world, where things happen as time progresses, and adversary positions, actions, and their own "recharging" effects are also tracked, then you can get a game with natural trade-off consequences from resting without doing anything, because it costs:




          • opportunities to take action before the situation changes will be lost if/while the player(s) do nothing but rest


          • adversaries can be taking actions the players don't want to happen, while they rest, and other events can happen in the game world


          • adversaries can be resting wounds and recharging their own abilities while the players recharge theirs








          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Apr 20 at 6:23









          DronzDronz

          715310




          715310








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Perfect! I just have to give enemies the same abilities. Now why didn't I think of that :P
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 20 at 13:01






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @JaredSmith Too much exposure to all the static game designs out there? ;-)
            $endgroup$
            – Dronz
            Apr 20 at 20:38














          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Perfect! I just have to give enemies the same abilities. Now why didn't I think of that :P
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 20 at 13:01






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @JaredSmith Too much exposure to all the static game designs out there? ;-)
            $endgroup$
            – Dronz
            Apr 20 at 20:38








          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Perfect! I just have to give enemies the same abilities. Now why didn't I think of that :P
          $endgroup$
          – Jared Smith
          Apr 20 at 13:01




          $begingroup$
          Perfect! I just have to give enemies the same abilities. Now why didn't I think of that :P
          $endgroup$
          – Jared Smith
          Apr 20 at 13:01




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          @JaredSmith Too much exposure to all the static game designs out there? ;-)
          $endgroup$
          – Dronz
          Apr 20 at 20:38




          $begingroup$
          @JaredSmith Too much exposure to all the static game designs out there? ;-)
          $endgroup$
          – Dronz
          Apr 20 at 20:38











          2












          $begingroup$

          As Wazpoodle noticed, the problem is mainly that defending for a long time do not have any other drawback than time.



          All the propositions revolve around giving the player other things to do during the waiting time, but in combination to those, you may also privilege fights that end quickly.



          For example, a fight that is finished in the first 3 turn may give a additional bonus (XP, money...), that degrade slowly over the duration of the combat.



          If the player want to turtle, he will receive a reduced / no bonus.



          This would incentivize this class (the burst attack may be enough to end the combat on the first turn), while also pushing the player to act now and make do if the burst is not enough.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That time incentive for winning quickly is a good idea. I'm going to have to play around with that.
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 20 at 13:00
















          2












          $begingroup$

          As Wazpoodle noticed, the problem is mainly that defending for a long time do not have any other drawback than time.



          All the propositions revolve around giving the player other things to do during the waiting time, but in combination to those, you may also privilege fights that end quickly.



          For example, a fight that is finished in the first 3 turn may give a additional bonus (XP, money...), that degrade slowly over the duration of the combat.



          If the player want to turtle, he will receive a reduced / no bonus.



          This would incentivize this class (the burst attack may be enough to end the combat on the first turn), while also pushing the player to act now and make do if the burst is not enough.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That time incentive for winning quickly is a good idea. I'm going to have to play around with that.
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 20 at 13:00














          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          As Wazpoodle noticed, the problem is mainly that defending for a long time do not have any other drawback than time.



          All the propositions revolve around giving the player other things to do during the waiting time, but in combination to those, you may also privilege fights that end quickly.



          For example, a fight that is finished in the first 3 turn may give a additional bonus (XP, money...), that degrade slowly over the duration of the combat.



          If the player want to turtle, he will receive a reduced / no bonus.



          This would incentivize this class (the burst attack may be enough to end the combat on the first turn), while also pushing the player to act now and make do if the burst is not enough.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          As Wazpoodle noticed, the problem is mainly that defending for a long time do not have any other drawback than time.



          All the propositions revolve around giving the player other things to do during the waiting time, but in combination to those, you may also privilege fights that end quickly.



          For example, a fight that is finished in the first 3 turn may give a additional bonus (XP, money...), that degrade slowly over the duration of the combat.



          If the player want to turtle, he will receive a reduced / no bonus.



          This would incentivize this class (the burst attack may be enough to end the combat on the first turn), while also pushing the player to act now and make do if the burst is not enough.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Apr 20 at 0:19









          DrakaSANDrakaSAN

          1463




          1463












          • $begingroup$
            That time incentive for winning quickly is a good idea. I'm going to have to play around with that.
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 20 at 13:00


















          • $begingroup$
            That time incentive for winning quickly is a good idea. I'm going to have to play around with that.
            $endgroup$
            – Jared Smith
            Apr 20 at 13:00
















          $begingroup$
          That time incentive for winning quickly is a good idea. I'm going to have to play around with that.
          $endgroup$
          – Jared Smith
          Apr 20 at 13:00




          $begingroup$
          That time incentive for winning quickly is a good idea. I'm going to have to play around with that.
          $endgroup$
          – Jared Smith
          Apr 20 at 13:00











          2












          $begingroup$

          A very useful way to think of balancing combat is that you have exactly one goal:




          Reduce the damage done to the party




          "Heal" is the most obvious way of achieving that goal: it simply erases the damage done.



          "Defend" is another direct means of doing so, via diminishing the effectiveness of enemy attacks.



          "Attack" is also a means of reducing the damage done to the party: if a player does enough damage to an enemy so that it dies one turn sooner, then that player has achieved the effect of sparing the party from an entire turn's worth of damage.



          If you don't want it to be optimal for players to usually choose "defend" rather than "attack", then the trick is to adjust the numbers so that attacking saves more damage than defending does. I think the best way to do this is to look at the figures




          • Determine what percentage of a turn's worth of damage the player mitigates by choosing "defend". Take care to account properly: for example, if "defend" only reduces the damage that specific player takes, then choosing that action only has any effect on those turns when that player gets attacked.

          • Estimate the entire party's average rate of damage per turn, and compare that to the amount of damage the player can do by choosing "attack". This should let you measure, in turns, how much faster combat will end by making that choice.




          Note that to get the effect you want to achieve, you probably need the average damage per turn your "burster" class does to be rather low.



          This means that you will have to design encounters so that the timing of damage is a valuable thing. For example, if an encounter has three identical enemies, damage done near the beginning of a fight is three times more valuable than damage done near the end of a fight — the former reduces the amount of time you spend with all three enemies damaging you, whereas the latter only reduces the amount of time you spend with a single enemy damaging you.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$


















            2












            $begingroup$

            A very useful way to think of balancing combat is that you have exactly one goal:




            Reduce the damage done to the party




            "Heal" is the most obvious way of achieving that goal: it simply erases the damage done.



            "Defend" is another direct means of doing so, via diminishing the effectiveness of enemy attacks.



            "Attack" is also a means of reducing the damage done to the party: if a player does enough damage to an enemy so that it dies one turn sooner, then that player has achieved the effect of sparing the party from an entire turn's worth of damage.



            If you don't want it to be optimal for players to usually choose "defend" rather than "attack", then the trick is to adjust the numbers so that attacking saves more damage than defending does. I think the best way to do this is to look at the figures




            • Determine what percentage of a turn's worth of damage the player mitigates by choosing "defend". Take care to account properly: for example, if "defend" only reduces the damage that specific player takes, then choosing that action only has any effect on those turns when that player gets attacked.

            • Estimate the entire party's average rate of damage per turn, and compare that to the amount of damage the player can do by choosing "attack". This should let you measure, in turns, how much faster combat will end by making that choice.




            Note that to get the effect you want to achieve, you probably need the average damage per turn your "burster" class does to be rather low.



            This means that you will have to design encounters so that the timing of damage is a valuable thing. For example, if an encounter has three identical enemies, damage done near the beginning of a fight is three times more valuable than damage done near the end of a fight — the former reduces the amount of time you spend with all three enemies damaging you, whereas the latter only reduces the amount of time you spend with a single enemy damaging you.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$
















              2












              2








              2





              $begingroup$

              A very useful way to think of balancing combat is that you have exactly one goal:




              Reduce the damage done to the party




              "Heal" is the most obvious way of achieving that goal: it simply erases the damage done.



              "Defend" is another direct means of doing so, via diminishing the effectiveness of enemy attacks.



              "Attack" is also a means of reducing the damage done to the party: if a player does enough damage to an enemy so that it dies one turn sooner, then that player has achieved the effect of sparing the party from an entire turn's worth of damage.



              If you don't want it to be optimal for players to usually choose "defend" rather than "attack", then the trick is to adjust the numbers so that attacking saves more damage than defending does. I think the best way to do this is to look at the figures




              • Determine what percentage of a turn's worth of damage the player mitigates by choosing "defend". Take care to account properly: for example, if "defend" only reduces the damage that specific player takes, then choosing that action only has any effect on those turns when that player gets attacked.

              • Estimate the entire party's average rate of damage per turn, and compare that to the amount of damage the player can do by choosing "attack". This should let you measure, in turns, how much faster combat will end by making that choice.




              Note that to get the effect you want to achieve, you probably need the average damage per turn your "burster" class does to be rather low.



              This means that you will have to design encounters so that the timing of damage is a valuable thing. For example, if an encounter has three identical enemies, damage done near the beginning of a fight is three times more valuable than damage done near the end of a fight — the former reduces the amount of time you spend with all three enemies damaging you, whereas the latter only reduces the amount of time you spend with a single enemy damaging you.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



              A very useful way to think of balancing combat is that you have exactly one goal:




              Reduce the damage done to the party




              "Heal" is the most obvious way of achieving that goal: it simply erases the damage done.



              "Defend" is another direct means of doing so, via diminishing the effectiveness of enemy attacks.



              "Attack" is also a means of reducing the damage done to the party: if a player does enough damage to an enemy so that it dies one turn sooner, then that player has achieved the effect of sparing the party from an entire turn's worth of damage.



              If you don't want it to be optimal for players to usually choose "defend" rather than "attack", then the trick is to adjust the numbers so that attacking saves more damage than defending does. I think the best way to do this is to look at the figures




              • Determine what percentage of a turn's worth of damage the player mitigates by choosing "defend". Take care to account properly: for example, if "defend" only reduces the damage that specific player takes, then choosing that action only has any effect on those turns when that player gets attacked.

              • Estimate the entire party's average rate of damage per turn, and compare that to the amount of damage the player can do by choosing "attack". This should let you measure, in turns, how much faster combat will end by making that choice.




              Note that to get the effect you want to achieve, you probably need the average damage per turn your "burster" class does to be rather low.



              This means that you will have to design encounters so that the timing of damage is a valuable thing. For example, if an encounter has three identical enemies, damage done near the beginning of a fight is three times more valuable than damage done near the end of a fight — the former reduces the amount of time you spend with all three enemies damaging you, whereas the latter only reduces the amount of time you spend with a single enemy damaging you.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Apr 20 at 8:22









              HurkylHurkyl

              81167




              81167























                  2












                  $begingroup$

                  Fundamentally, the options are to make the undesired player behavior less attractive, to make desired alternatives more attractive, or some combination of the two.



                  In terms of implementation, it might be worth considering non-linear solutions. You've already identified some disincentives, but I noticed that they all happen to be linear. For instance, limiting an ability to once every X time units. An example of a non-linear approach would be to use a limit of X+N where N is the number of times used thus far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is good, some is fine, but increasingly less so". In terms of theme, this maps on to the idea of diminishing returns.



                  You can also include more complex formulas. For instance, instead of a strictly increasing value for N, you could include a formula allowing it to gradually ease back over time. Or you could make it more aggressive, 1.5*N, 3*N, N^2, etc.



                  While this can give you extra flexibility to your design, there are some trade-offs to consider:




                  • it creates more parameters to balance

                  • it can create more obvious 'sweet spots' leading to more average play strategies


                    • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider if it detracts from the experience




                  Non-linearity can also be applied to incentives. For instance, one of the Ascension deck builder expansions has a enemy with a reward of X+N where N is the number of times this enemy has been defeated so far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is okay, more is better & increasingly so". In terms of theme, this maps onto the idea of compounded returns, reaping rewards for early investment.



                  Again, you can use more complex formulas. A common variant is to include a cap, for instance a reward of X+min(N,C) where N is the number of times, C is the cap and the min function gives you the smaller of the two.



                  As before, there are some trade-offs:




                  • it creates more parameters to balance

                  • it can create run away leader (aka snowball) effects leading to more extreme, all-in play strategies


                    • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider how it impacts the design








                  share|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$


















                    2












                    $begingroup$

                    Fundamentally, the options are to make the undesired player behavior less attractive, to make desired alternatives more attractive, or some combination of the two.



                    In terms of implementation, it might be worth considering non-linear solutions. You've already identified some disincentives, but I noticed that they all happen to be linear. For instance, limiting an ability to once every X time units. An example of a non-linear approach would be to use a limit of X+N where N is the number of times used thus far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is good, some is fine, but increasingly less so". In terms of theme, this maps on to the idea of diminishing returns.



                    You can also include more complex formulas. For instance, instead of a strictly increasing value for N, you could include a formula allowing it to gradually ease back over time. Or you could make it more aggressive, 1.5*N, 3*N, N^2, etc.



                    While this can give you extra flexibility to your design, there are some trade-offs to consider:




                    • it creates more parameters to balance

                    • it can create more obvious 'sweet spots' leading to more average play strategies


                      • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider if it detracts from the experience




                    Non-linearity can also be applied to incentives. For instance, one of the Ascension deck builder expansions has a enemy with a reward of X+N where N is the number of times this enemy has been defeated so far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is okay, more is better & increasingly so". In terms of theme, this maps onto the idea of compounded returns, reaping rewards for early investment.



                    Again, you can use more complex formulas. A common variant is to include a cap, for instance a reward of X+min(N,C) where N is the number of times, C is the cap and the min function gives you the smaller of the two.



                    As before, there are some trade-offs:




                    • it creates more parameters to balance

                    • it can create run away leader (aka snowball) effects leading to more extreme, all-in play strategies


                      • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider how it impacts the design








                    share|improve this answer











                    $endgroup$
















                      2












                      2








                      2





                      $begingroup$

                      Fundamentally, the options are to make the undesired player behavior less attractive, to make desired alternatives more attractive, or some combination of the two.



                      In terms of implementation, it might be worth considering non-linear solutions. You've already identified some disincentives, but I noticed that they all happen to be linear. For instance, limiting an ability to once every X time units. An example of a non-linear approach would be to use a limit of X+N where N is the number of times used thus far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is good, some is fine, but increasingly less so". In terms of theme, this maps on to the idea of diminishing returns.



                      You can also include more complex formulas. For instance, instead of a strictly increasing value for N, you could include a formula allowing it to gradually ease back over time. Or you could make it more aggressive, 1.5*N, 3*N, N^2, etc.



                      While this can give you extra flexibility to your design, there are some trade-offs to consider:




                      • it creates more parameters to balance

                      • it can create more obvious 'sweet spots' leading to more average play strategies


                        • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider if it detracts from the experience




                      Non-linearity can also be applied to incentives. For instance, one of the Ascension deck builder expansions has a enemy with a reward of X+N where N is the number of times this enemy has been defeated so far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is okay, more is better & increasingly so". In terms of theme, this maps onto the idea of compounded returns, reaping rewards for early investment.



                      Again, you can use more complex formulas. A common variant is to include a cap, for instance a reward of X+min(N,C) where N is the number of times, C is the cap and the min function gives you the smaller of the two.



                      As before, there are some trade-offs:




                      • it creates more parameters to balance

                      • it can create run away leader (aka snowball) effects leading to more extreme, all-in play strategies


                        • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider how it impacts the design








                      share|improve this answer











                      $endgroup$



                      Fundamentally, the options are to make the undesired player behavior less attractive, to make desired alternatives more attractive, or some combination of the two.



                      In terms of implementation, it might be worth considering non-linear solutions. You've already identified some disincentives, but I noticed that they all happen to be linear. For instance, limiting an ability to once every X time units. An example of a non-linear approach would be to use a limit of X+N where N is the number of times used thus far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is good, some is fine, but increasingly less so". In terms of theme, this maps on to the idea of diminishing returns.



                      You can also include more complex formulas. For instance, instead of a strictly increasing value for N, you could include a formula allowing it to gradually ease back over time. Or you could make it more aggressive, 1.5*N, 3*N, N^2, etc.



                      While this can give you extra flexibility to your design, there are some trade-offs to consider:




                      • it creates more parameters to balance

                      • it can create more obvious 'sweet spots' leading to more average play strategies


                        • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider if it detracts from the experience




                      Non-linearity can also be applied to incentives. For instance, one of the Ascension deck builder expansions has a enemy with a reward of X+N where N is the number of times this enemy has been defeated so far. Conceptually, you would apply this to something where you find yourself thinking "a little is okay, more is better & increasingly so". In terms of theme, this maps onto the idea of compounded returns, reaping rewards for early investment.



                      Again, you can use more complex formulas. A common variant is to include a cap, for instance a reward of X+min(N,C) where N is the number of times, C is the cap and the min function gives you the smaller of the two.



                      As before, there are some trade-offs:




                      • it creates more parameters to balance

                      • it can create run away leader (aka snowball) effects leading to more extreme, all-in play strategies


                        • not necessarily bad, but you need to consider how it impacts the design









                      share|improve this answer














                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer








                      edited Apr 20 at 15:45

























                      answered Apr 20 at 15:37









                      PikalekPikalek

                      6,69312337




                      6,69312337























                          1












                          $begingroup$

                          A potential solution could have the burst damage be enabled by other skills, such as debuffs, self buffs, and the like. In MMOs this is called a rotation - it's been awhile, but IIRC WoW has a good example with the fire warlock, who has a spell that does a ton of damage, but with limited CDs and a bunch of pre-requisites for getting the most out of the spell.






                          share|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$


















                            1












                            $begingroup$

                            A potential solution could have the burst damage be enabled by other skills, such as debuffs, self buffs, and the like. In MMOs this is called a rotation - it's been awhile, but IIRC WoW has a good example with the fire warlock, who has a spell that does a ton of damage, but with limited CDs and a bunch of pre-requisites for getting the most out of the spell.






                            share|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$
















                              1












                              1








                              1





                              $begingroup$

                              A potential solution could have the burst damage be enabled by other skills, such as debuffs, self buffs, and the like. In MMOs this is called a rotation - it's been awhile, but IIRC WoW has a good example with the fire warlock, who has a spell that does a ton of damage, but with limited CDs and a bunch of pre-requisites for getting the most out of the spell.






                              share|improve this answer









                              $endgroup$



                              A potential solution could have the burst damage be enabled by other skills, such as debuffs, self buffs, and the like. In MMOs this is called a rotation - it's been awhile, but IIRC WoW has a good example with the fire warlock, who has a spell that does a ton of damage, but with limited CDs and a bunch of pre-requisites for getting the most out of the spell.







                              share|improve this answer












                              share|improve this answer



                              share|improve this answer










                              answered Apr 19 at 18:12









                              Christian BolerChristian Boler

                              311




                              311























                                  1












                                  $begingroup$

                                  How about making the abilities recharge from enemy kills? If there's a boss every, say, 10 enemies, and each kill recharges 10% of the power needed, the optimal strategy is, indeed, to use your other abilities to take out the normal enemies, then fire the big guns at the boss.



                                  Path of Exile uses this structure for both flasks (which instantly recharge in town) and Vaal skills (which only recharge in battle).



                                  If you're dead-set on having this be time/turn based, then you need a mechanism in place that punishes taking a long time. For example, enemy monsters can have the same mechanics; if you take too long killing them, they start unleashing dangerous moves. Or reward taking a short time; you get bonus xp or resources if you can quickly kill the enemies.






                                  share|improve this answer









                                  $endgroup$


















                                    1












                                    $begingroup$

                                    How about making the abilities recharge from enemy kills? If there's a boss every, say, 10 enemies, and each kill recharges 10% of the power needed, the optimal strategy is, indeed, to use your other abilities to take out the normal enemies, then fire the big guns at the boss.



                                    Path of Exile uses this structure for both flasks (which instantly recharge in town) and Vaal skills (which only recharge in battle).



                                    If you're dead-set on having this be time/turn based, then you need a mechanism in place that punishes taking a long time. For example, enemy monsters can have the same mechanics; if you take too long killing them, they start unleashing dangerous moves. Or reward taking a short time; you get bonus xp or resources if you can quickly kill the enemies.






                                    share|improve this answer









                                    $endgroup$
















                                      1












                                      1








                                      1





                                      $begingroup$

                                      How about making the abilities recharge from enemy kills? If there's a boss every, say, 10 enemies, and each kill recharges 10% of the power needed, the optimal strategy is, indeed, to use your other abilities to take out the normal enemies, then fire the big guns at the boss.



                                      Path of Exile uses this structure for both flasks (which instantly recharge in town) and Vaal skills (which only recharge in battle).



                                      If you're dead-set on having this be time/turn based, then you need a mechanism in place that punishes taking a long time. For example, enemy monsters can have the same mechanics; if you take too long killing them, they start unleashing dangerous moves. Or reward taking a short time; you get bonus xp or resources if you can quickly kill the enemies.






                                      share|improve this answer









                                      $endgroup$



                                      How about making the abilities recharge from enemy kills? If there's a boss every, say, 10 enemies, and each kill recharges 10% of the power needed, the optimal strategy is, indeed, to use your other abilities to take out the normal enemies, then fire the big guns at the boss.



                                      Path of Exile uses this structure for both flasks (which instantly recharge in town) and Vaal skills (which only recharge in battle).



                                      If you're dead-set on having this be time/turn based, then you need a mechanism in place that punishes taking a long time. For example, enemy monsters can have the same mechanics; if you take too long killing them, they start unleashing dangerous moves. Or reward taking a short time; you get bonus xp or resources if you can quickly kill the enemies.







                                      share|improve this answer












                                      share|improve this answer



                                      share|improve this answer










                                      answered Apr 19 at 19:29









                                      user3757614user3757614

                                      1111




                                      1111






























                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded




















































                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Game Development Stack Exchange!


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid



                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgamedev.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f170164%2fhow-can-i-prevent-balance-waiting-and-turtling-as-a-response-to-cooldown-mechani%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum

                                          He _____ here since 1970 . Answer needed [closed]What does “since he was so high” mean?Meaning of “catch birds for”?How do I ensure “since” takes the meaning I want?“Who cares here” meaningWhat does “right round toward” mean?the time tense (had now been detected)What does the phrase “ring around the roses” mean here?Correct usage of “visited upon”Meaning of “foiled rail sabotage bid”It was the third time I had gone to Rome or It is the third time I had been to Rome

                                          Slayer Innehåll Historia | Stil, komposition och lyrik | Bandets betydelse och framgångar | Sidoprojekt och samarbeten | Kontroverser | Medlemmar | Utmärkelser och nomineringar | Turnéer och festivaler | Diskografi | Referenser | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmenywww.slayer.net”Metal Massacre vol. 1””Metal Massacre vol. 3””Metal Massacre Volume III””Show No Mercy””Haunting the Chapel””Live Undead””Hell Awaits””Reign in Blood””Reign in Blood””Gold & Platinum – Reign in Blood””Golden Gods Awards Winners”originalet”Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Looks Back On 37-Year Career In New Video Series: Part Two””South of Heaven””Gold & Platinum – South of Heaven””Seasons in the Abyss””Gold & Platinum - Seasons in the Abyss””Divine Intervention””Divine Intervention - Release group by Slayer””Gold & Platinum - Divine Intervention””Live Intrusion””Undisputed Attitude””Abolish Government/Superficial Love””Release “Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer” by Various Artists””Diabolus in Musica””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””God Hates Us All””Systematic - Relationships””War at the Warfield””Gold & Platinum - War at the Warfield””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””Gold & Platinum - Still Reigning””Metallica, Slayer, Iron Mauden Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Eternal Pyre””Eternal Pyre - Slayer release group””Eternal Pyre””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Bullet-For My Valentine booed at Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Unholy Aliance””The End Of Slayer?””Slayer: We Could Thrash Out Two More Albums If We're Fast Enough...””'The Unholy Alliance: Chapter III' UK Dates Added”originalet”Megadeth And Slayer To Co-Headline 'Canadian Carnage' Trek”originalet”World Painted Blood””Release “World Painted Blood” by Slayer””Metallica Heading To Cinemas””Slayer, Megadeth To Join Forces For 'European Carnage' Tour - Dec. 18, 2010”originalet”Slayer's Hanneman Contracts Acute Infection; Band To Bring In Guest Guitarist””Cannibal Corpse's Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer's Guest Guitarist”originalet”Slayer’s Jeff Hanneman Dead at 49””Dave Lombardo Says He Made Only $67,000 In 2011 While Touring With Slayer””Slayer: We Do Not Agree With Dave Lombardo's Substance Or Timeline Of Events””Slayer Welcomes Drummer Paul Bostaph Back To The Fold””Slayer Hope to Unveil Never-Before-Heard Jeff Hanneman Material on Next Album””Slayer Debut New Song 'Implode' During Surprise Golden Gods Appearance””Release group Repentless by Slayer””Repentless - Slayer - Credits””Slayer””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer - to release comic book "Repentless #1"””Slayer To Release 'Repentless' 6.66" Vinyl Box Set””BREAKING NEWS: Slayer Announce Farewell Tour””Slayer Recruit Lamb of God, Anthrax, Behemoth + Testament for Final Tour””Slayer lägger ner efter 37 år””Slayer Announces Second North American Leg Of 'Final' Tour””Final World Tour””Slayer Announces Final European Tour With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Tour Europe With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Play 'Last French Show Ever' At Next Year's Hellfst””Slayer's Final World Tour Will Extend Into 2019””Death Angel's Rob Cavestany On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour: 'Some Of Us Could See This Coming'””Testament Has No Plans To Retire Anytime Soon, Says Chuck Billy””Anthrax's Scott Ian On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour Plans: 'I Was Surprised And I Wasn't Surprised'””Slayer””Slayer's Morbid Schlock””Review/Rock; For Slayer, the Mania Is the Message””Slayer - Biography””Slayer - Reign In Blood”originalet”Dave Lombardo””An exclusive oral history of Slayer”originalet”Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman”originalet”Thinking Out Loud: Slayer's Kerry King on hair metal, Satan and being polite””Slayer Lyrics””Slayer - Biography””Most influential artists for extreme metal music””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dies aged 49””Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer””Gateway to Hell: A Tribute to Slayer””Covered In Blood””Slayer: The Origins of Thrash in San Francisco, CA.””Why They Rule - #6 Slayer”originalet”Guitar World's 100 Greatest Heavy Metal Guitarists Of All Time”originalet”The fans have spoken: Slayer comes out on top in readers' polls”originalet”Tribute to Jeff Hanneman (1964-2013)””Lamb Of God Frontman: We Sound Like A Slayer Rip-Off””BEHEMOTH Frontman Pays Tribute To SLAYER's JEFF HANNEMAN””Slayer, Hatebreed Doing Double Duty On This Year's Ozzfest””System of a Down””Lacuna Coil’s Andrea Ferro Talks Influences, Skateboarding, Band Origins + More””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Into The Lungs of Hell””Slayer rules - en utställning om fans””Slayer and Their Fans Slashed Through a No-Holds-Barred Night at Gas Monkey””Home””Slayer””Gold & Platinum - The Big 4 Live from Sofia, Bulgaria””Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Kerry King””2008-02-23: Wiltern, Los Angeles, CA, USA””Slayer's Kerry King To Perform With Megadeth Tonight! - Oct. 21, 2010”originalet”Dave Lombardo - Biography”Slayer Case DismissedArkiveradUltimate Classic Rock: Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dead at 49.”Slayer: "We could never do any thing like Some Kind Of Monster..."””Cannibal Corpse'S Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer'S Guest Guitarist | The Official Slayer Site”originalet”Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Kerrang! Awards 2006 Blog: Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Kerrang! Awards 2013: Kerrang! Legend”originalet”Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maien Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Bullet For My Valentine Booed At Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer's Concert History””Slayer - Relationships””Slayer - Releases”Slayers officiella webbplatsSlayer på MusicBrainzOfficiell webbplatsSlayerSlayerr1373445760000 0001 1540 47353068615-5086262726cb13906545x(data)6033143kn20030215029