Talk:Ember/@comment-2A02:8108:1840:3608:4543:7633:C1A9:C4C-20191005143615/@comment-24.231.123.84-20191006210143

So, let me ask.

How does knowing the specific mathematics behind how cost and drain over time are calculated change the results? If someone doesn't know specifically why fleeting expertise and streamline offset the duration loss, do they somehow not reach the 75% reduction to both cost and drain? If DE doesn't need to explain exactly how mechanics they alter work, then do I need to explain exactly how it works for it to be effective, or will telling a player "Fleeting + Streamline offsets the duration loss of Fleeting and achieves the max energy cost and drain reduction for abilities" still give them the same result?

If the maximum reduction for both ability cost and drain over time is to 25% of base, how is that any different than an effective efficiency cap of 75%? Does it actually matter if the "hidden" efficiency value goes higher, if the "effective" cap is a 75% reduction?

And to clarify, I specifically put "substitutes" in quotes to imply it is figurative. As in, y'know, it'll offset the duration loss. If I had meant it literally substitutes duration I probably would have not put it into quotes in the first place. I think you may have misinterpreted what I said. Here's what I mean: the max efficiency is 175% because the lowest cost/drain can be reduced to is 25% of base, effectively meaning you cannot gain more power-efficiency past 175% as the reduction does not go below 25% of base cost.

And also I'd disagree, I think DE should in always explain exactly how a new change to the game works, especially when it will potentially have a big impact on builds. We only lucked out that fleeting+streamline still kept abilities at the lowest cost/drain because duration's impact isn't a 1:1 scale like efficiency