Linear scaling for impulse cost - #1145
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Even with the current system, you can easily get a linear cost for impulse by looping a bunch of power-1 impulses, and once you know about that trick there's no reason not to use it. The quadratic scaling basically just makes the spell more expensive to use for people who don't understand the implications of the (somewhat confusingly described) extra cost on additional casts.
I don't think it makes much sense to have an objectively better way to use a spell locked behind nothing but knowledge of a specific trick. Consequently, this PR removes the extra cost for multiple casts of Impulse on the same entity, and changes the cost formula itself to just be a simple
2*power.This is technically a significant buff, but anyone using high-level impulse for the last few years was using the linear cost trick anyway, so I don't think this change will actually have much effect on balance.