Litany of Hate

Warhammer 40K Feedback

By Vlricus von Kronstadt

Contavius replied

9 35

This idea is credited to my girlfriend, which is why I post it now even though its probably a little late in the development.

The idea came from me explaining that in regards to moral-compass the Inquisition has two "main" groups. The puritans; if in doubt add more exterminatus, and the Radicals; brothers with this demonblade I could save humanity.

Since it seems that atleast the choices between the different faction will collide at one point, she suggested that it would be cool to have a hatred-system which could reflect the times the other faction had gotten the better of you in some manner. (Since I am unsure how conflict between faction/cabals are gonna play out it also hard to specify how one would benefit from such a system.)

She suggested that if the faction of the playerbase becomes heavy on Puritan or Radical, the minor could get a SLIGHT increase in cabal exp, difficulty-rating on missions or in the extreme 1) bonus in pvp and/or 2) additional options in priority missions.

This is just a rough outline of an idea, but when she mentioned the idea of using hatred as a stat/or whatever I was totally sold on just the sheer "Warhammer 40k vibe" of it.

Sincerly, from the better half of,

Vlricus von Kronstadt

Store Page

10 comments

Litany of Hate
Your Thoughts? Please login to place your opinion. Not a member yet? Register here and now!

Airsick Hydra

122 709

Have to say I really like a small underdog bonus as a means to help auto balance the ratios.

+1 from me.

Vlricus von Kronstadt

9 35

Airsick Hydra

I agree. If nothing else it could simply serve as an "fluff"-meter, while also being a redudency-system should there be a need for balance. In my mind its better to already have a none-intrusive back-system in-place instead of having to incorporate new onces.

Inquisitor Thaddeus

10 86

Good thought

Irrelewahnt

1 185

There is still one matter to be seen. What will the perks and the skilltrees bring to the table. If they not identical benefit wise there will be the min/max bunch who joins the OP faction. If this faction is the underdog for some reason and you give them even more benefits this might be counterproduktive.

The thought is a good one but we don't see all infos needed to make any assumptions. The same problem is suffered by cabals... the more members you got the more Cabal XP you get simply by having more members, totaly silly :D because still everyone needs the same XP for a Cabal level up. If you buff the XP gain or lessen the items needed to rank up a cabal according to the number of players there will be a sweet spot somewhere that will be again used by min/maxers.

It's pretty hard to make up anything. The best thing to do would be a catchup mechanic. If you are behind (compared player Rank/acc Xp or for Cabals the cabal level) a hidden catchup mechanic kicks in so you get more xp to close the gap between the furthest evolved and the least evolved players. Casuals will catch up faster, smaller Cabals will catch up faster and factions will benefit from this as well because less of X is bonus for X untill X is as potent as Y and not further. I think this is the only way to handle stuff but after all it might be pretty useless because not many people care about it.

Vlricus von Kronstadt

9 35

Inquisitor Thaddeus

Thank you.

Vlricus von Kronstadt

9 35

Irrelewahnt

Yes I agree; without further information the practical implimentation of the idea is virtually impossible. I also agree with the idea that asymmetrical balance is a knives-edge as soon as they have numbers attached instead of just fluff.

But I did state that it needn't have any practical effect more then, in its more basic form, a number which tells you how much you despise those heretical Radicals/Puritans.

Don't get me wrong; love the input. Thank you for that. But this was more of a "throw an idea out there because it sounds cool in concept", rather then a must-have feature in the game.

I still stand by my statement that having non-intrusive back-up systems already implementet can often be a good idea.

Sincerly,

Vlricus von Kronstadt

Irrelewahnt

1 185

Vlricus von Kronstadt

But it is a kinf of a "must have" somehow. If something is totaly unintresting game balance wise, like puritan tree makes you glow in the dark and give you 10% more dmg while radibals get 150% dmg boost there is a gap. If there is a gap things will go south if you dont give other benefits somehow.

That's why I'm concerned about the Cabal system for example. You get benefits the bigger your cabal is like more xp and you can do missions faster if the people are aktive. If you are in a small Cabal with a hand full of friends you'll suffer compared to the big cabal. If this is a logic throughout the game we have some big problems ;).

Vlricus von Kronstadt

9 35

Irrelewahnt

All valid concerns, but I would like to point out that higher damage, faster leveling or indeed the largest Cabal isn't automatically equivalent to having the largest impact in a Puritan vs. Radical scenario.

And even if they make a direct correlation between aformentioned things and game-impact, in a faction vs. faction scenario, wouldn't that make a system like Hatred help to balance out exactly those kind of problems?

Sincerly,

Vlricus von Kronstadt

Christs

2 175

I am not a w40 nut. But any ideas as long as they really mean something(unlike the current classes). If we make a choice it needs to be very hard to change and make our char. Different.

Contavius

15 39

It actually is rather simple as answers go,

If you want the idea of skill point redistribution to be difficult then you follow Nurgle because of stagnation.

If you want the idea of skill point redistribution to be easy and more accessible then you follow Tzeentch.

If you love the ideas for skill point redistribution or hate the ideas of skill point redistribution then Slaneesh is your man/woman ?

If you just hate having to wait till May 11th then i would say Khorne is your god of choice.