Puma

May 6, 2023

On 5/4/2023 at 2:41 AM, Rudra said:

If the set underperforms, then make a request based off that. Not off the argument that the activation time is too long (since it has a faster activation time than most other Blaster primary powers of the same tier) or that it doesn't affect the fight (since it applies its damage sooner than most other T9s). It was your claim that the activation time was too long that got this entire argument going. I'm not arguing damage. I'm not even arguing effectiveness. I'm just arguing that if other T9s can and do affect the current fight any team is in regardless of what they are fighting, then so does Category 5. Your problem with the powers is the damage. Not the activation time.

If only this had been brought up... by like...several people before it was ever live.

And Rudra, damage and activation time are inherently linked, to some degree, in this game.

If I offered you a powerset with every attack doing 2000 points of damage, but each attack took 1 full minute to activate, NO one would take it.

Likewise if I offered someone a powerset where every attack did 1o points of damage but was instant nobody would take it. Both would be useless.

Anyone looking at this post with the desire to really engage understands the issue is that, for the OP, storm cell (and cat 5) takes forever to really fully activate, and so it hurts their damage output overall. Every attack is basically built around storm cell, so if you want to perform "up to par" with most other players and your own experiences with other sets, you end up having to start each fight laying these slow building attacks, but since no one else using an other set on the team does, the mobs die before that activation time even pays off.

May 6, 2023

On 5/1/2023 at 6:23 AM, Saiyajinzoningen said:

i think thematically storms take time to build up and form. The devs have said that this is supposed to be a fun set, not a top tier set. I think it mostly succeeds. just a heads up in the storm secondary set most of the powers have a cast time of 2 seconds or longer. So the cast time is more or less in line with its counterpart.

Go look at the numbers. This is actually false. It does middle to middle-low damage without the benefits of storm cell.

May 6, 2023

11 hours ago, Luminara said:

Okay.

Your comparison to Savage Melee isn't valid because the work was done in the SCoRE years, when the developers were catering to an incredibly small group, at a much more relaxed pace, and trying to satisfy everyone in order to keep the server running and that scant handful of people there. It wasn't even remotely like a real beta, open or closed. And your comprehension of how an open beta should be conducted is clearly distorted by that experience. Open beta is not a negotiation. Open beta is not the time for sweeping changes. Open beta, in this environment, for a larger audience, is the "is it good enough to go live" point.

This is the second, if not the third time in this conversation you've said things about my experience with beta testing and design that are just wrong. Again, your arrogance and disdain for me for posting my dissatisfaction and concerns with the current process are...interesting. If you actually read what I've said in this thread you'll see I have a lot more experience from BOTH sides than your post here says. It's pretty ironic though, that you admit that small group alpha testing is somehow the only place major changes should be made, and then on the other hand say somehow Savage melee (and Sentinels, and others) were different because that was a small group testing back then.

And the second part about "open beta not being a negotiation" is PRECISELY why, if you're going to keep this process where alpha is tested on a completely separate server by a small group, and even then the Devs have largely solidified the directions and concepts of new sets, it would be helpful for the Devs, in my opinion, to get feedback before development even begins about those ideas.

No one has perfect vision, and right now you have a small group setting things in motion to the point where it's hard to roll them back even if unforeseen issues arise because too few eyes are on it until it's too far down the line. No matter how talented, passionate, and well meaning the Devs are (and they are), they have limitations as well. So if they want to keep open beta as "only seeing if it's good enough to go live" (which should NEVER be the design goal), then they need to frontload some of that feedback and examination by others ahead of development. If not, they should probably adjust the idea of open beta, or, try the other suggestion I made and institute an intermediary spot. Maybe have 1: the alpha discord group (initial testing of the Dev's first draft of concepts by a smaller, trusted group of players), 2: an "open beta" here where it's open to anyone to give feedback on the design choices and usability of what came out of alpha among a larger populace, and then 3: a "Refinement server" that seeks to refine the numbers, big fixes, etc. before it goes live. The last two should be open to the public on Homecoming if you really want enough feedback. Saying "anyone can join the Gold Standard Testers" sounds nice, but it takes too much effort for most to join it in Discord, get approved, get that server going, etc. You're naturally weeding out a lot of players who would otherwise be willing to test.

Under the current system, if the "average player" DOES come and test on open beta and post their feedback, they just get attacked by you and others for not being there every step of the process that is mostly closed off to them without a ton of effort.

Well...cool I guess.

May 5, 2023

On 4/26/2023 at 11:54 PM, Rudra said:

It's not a question of not wanting data. It's a question of community perception. As far as the community goes, would it make the slightest bit of difference if the devs did a secret poll and acted on the results that only they could see the results of as opposed to the devs combing through the game's data to draw their own conclusions and act on? As far as the community is concerned? It would still be the devs doing secret squirrel stuff with nothing for us to see or understand. So nothing would really change, because no one would understand what was going on in dev world any more than we did before this thread was started. If anything, it would most likely lead to angry players. "I know for a fact that option C was the preferred one! Everyone I know or spoke with voted for option C! What did the devs do though? They went with option A! Our voices don't matter!"

Edit: And of course I wind up starting a new page so my comment is floating in La La Land with no references for what it is about. This comment is in response to @Rigged's last comment on the preceding page.

I disagree. It is EXACTLY about wanting data, or at least should be. PART of that data IS community perception, but also understanding the myriad issues that a cool concept may actually have BEFORE you've become emotionally and productively attached to it to the point it won't change, etc. What would change is the end product, and also a slightly better understanding for the community of the general possible directions of these products and that they don't come, suddenly, handed down from on-high. You would very much be more likely to get products that serve the community better.

May 5, 2023

On 4/26/2023 at 11:09 PM, Luminara said:

Well, I participated in betas as early as Issue 5, and I can say with authority that nothing you said is reflective of either Cryptic or Paragon's approach. They didn't ask players how to proceed, they didn't solicit suggestions, they didn't throw the doors open and invite players to help them design things. Nor could they, as they were always working two to three Issues ahead and kept their work secret. By the time something went to the test server, it was essentially done, and only altered if they felt it was warranted.

Case in point: Trick Arrows. This is directly from my Issue 11 TA guide, the Trick Arrows Enchiridion.

There was no discussion, there were no compromises offered, there wasn't any poll or focused feedback thread to bounce ideas back and forth between players and developers, TA went to the test server, with no announcement that it was even being created until it hit that test server, then it was beaten into the ground with a nerf bat the size of the Washington Monument and pushed to the live servers without a single adjustment based on player testing and input. They didn't even fix the bugs, or redress oversights, like Flash Arrow's hit check.

They didn't listen to anyone. I don't say that out of anger or because I'm harboring resentment, I say it because I witnessed and, in time, understood their design and development process. By the time something went to the test server, it already had 8-12 months of work put into it and the people who'd worked on it were up to their ears in three other projects in various stages of completion. They didn't have the time for a month of back-and-forth with players, or the interest in making radical changes at the last second, based purely on player feedback and opinion. They worked that way from the day Emmert took over as lead to the second the servers were turned off, and they did it because that was the only way they could work without falling behind.

The HC team also has a work schedule. The HC team also has multiple other projects they're working on. The HC team also has deadlines to meet. And every time a beta is dragged on for weeks after it should have gone live, by people throwing tantrums and demanding changes based solely on the patch notes, people jumping into the feedback threads to bicker and dick-wave over pointless bullshit that isn't even relevant to the thread, people acting like drama queens because they're convinced that their feedback is the only feedback that matters, the HC team falls further behind. And since they're doing all of this in their spare time, as a hobby, that's means they're forced to spend even less time with their family and friends, or playing the game they're working so hard to maintain and grow.

And now you want them to start working by committee. Let three thousand people collectively tell them what to work on and how to do it. People who are disinterested in participating in the pre-beta stages, and people who are so goddamn full of themselves that they'll start threads to complain about their voices not being heard every time the HC team doesn't consult them when they do anything, and people who are so fucking clueless that they think the developers whip things up the night before a beta is launched.

I will agree that one of us is full of themselves, but it isn't me. I have never been rude to you, and I haven't been rude to the Devs, even when calling out things I don't like. I have even thanked them for their responses. I don't deserve you being insulting to me, and frankly, showing an attitude of superiority and contempt to the majority of the player base that is not in keeping with City of Heroes's culture.

And just a reminder that Savage Melee wasn't released by Paragon.

And I can promise you I've participated in testing in multiple phases, on multiple servers. So frankly, either address what I've actually said or take your hyperbolic "by committee of thousands" response to the "role player" forum with the other works of fantasy.

April 27, 2023

1 hour ago, Shadeknight said:

Polls would do nothing good. Polls can be botted. Polls can be manipulated in any number of ways.

That being said, I can also see no harm in trying them once. If only because I can be horribly petty and going "See how absolutely useless or damaging that poll was?" is a level of 'I told you so' I'm here for. That or being proved wrong.

I mean, what are your thoughts on these two posts by Devs, then, and how they played out?

The first is the exact kind of thing I'm talking about: here is our vision, now what do you all think about that, good/bad/and ugly? My only change would be to have the thread locked with only a link to a private poll as the way to respond, giving the devs feedback without the ability for others to attack people's thoughts.

April 27, 2023

11 minutes ago, Player-1 said:

Hi all, I want to shed some light on our process to clear some of the confusion, as well as touch on a few of the misconceptions that have popped up.

Firstly, at a high level our pipeline on the Powers side resembles:

Step 1)

Pitching internally to other Developers and workshopping very basic versions of powers to get a working model. This can be as simple as "We have not touched Powerset A in a while, it may be due for an update" or as complex as "We found a new way to create a graphic effect, AND we can use new technology to grant powers to a pet..." to create something brand new. At this stage we can get a feel for what is or is not worth putting on the table for a release based on the complexities and resources involved. Using this last Page as a reference, we had the bandwidth to not only create a brand new Blast Powerset, but also touch up all the others as we could work on both items at once very easily as compared to working on a new Armor Powerset while also trying to juggle Blast updates. Many ideas are stuck at this stage to this day due to various circumstances or needing other dominoes to fall internally.

Step 2)

Once a change is in a workable state internally, we release it to the Alpha testers in a closed environment. It is here where we often make the biggest changes and often end up rolling things back. A change can pass internal scrutiny, but when there are more eyes on it there are naturally new things that will be discovered. For example, we had changes to Archery that needed to be rolled back during Alpha due to bug reports that would take more resources than we could allocate for the time. The goal at this stage is to find anything major and address it before adding in more testers to the mix.

Step 3)

Next step is Beta where we release to an even wider audience. At this stage, the major aspects of a release are meant to be polished and it is a rarity that we would make drastic changes. We are mainly looking for any last bugs or altering "dials" for the most part such as a power doing a bit more damage, recharging faster, or so on. The next step from here once all is well would be a Live Release, so we want to utilize a larger number of testers to find anything that has sifted through the prior steps in order to deliver as polished a final product as possible.

This process can always see improvements. I do not speak for the other developers, but I for one like the idea of having more polls or forms for feedback as it can be useful for hitting specific questions, though that would require more resources to create and sort through them, as well as coordination with delivering them to testers. "Too Many Cooks" can be a real challenge when it comes to subjective opinions, and even something like a poll can end up with the majority being disappointed where out of options A, B, and C, B wins with 40% to the dismay of the 60% split between A and C.

We all love City of Heroes. Those of us who choose to participate in the Forums, on Discord, and especially in Beta and Alpha testing are often the most passionate players as they take time out of playing the game to gush about it with their friends! That said, unfortunately there need to be steps in place to try and filter all the feedback in ways that are actionable by the Development team such as closed Alpha testing that you need to opt into and keep on the down low compared to more open Beta testing that anyone can help with.

This leads to the second topic: Anyone can bring valuable feedback to the table, anyone can steer the direction of certain changes, but not everyone. Simply due to logistics, we cannot action on every cool idea that comes up nor can we have an infinite team of people working on the game. The best way to get your ideas heard and actioned on is to provide sound backing to them via context and evidence, and by showcasing that you can work well with others. Storm Blast was created by 5 members of the Development team with various degrees of input and stress testing, across different disciplines of design. This would not be possible without good coordination and an objective approach to the work at hand where even something like tweaking the duration of a DoT would need another round of testing before it hit Alpha Testers.

Hours upon Hours of time is spent on even the smaller changes, I believe with the Blast Powersets alone I had put in about 50 hours into just running statistics on the tweaks compared to the live versions, let alone actually playing them alongside juggling home life, work, and other items in the page such as Storm Blast! This was due to us having specific goals in mind when it comes to how the Powersets perform relative to one another, there are far too many other variables at play which is what we look to the Alpha and Beta tests for as otherwise it is impossible to cover every angle.

When it comes to that feedback, we really look for specifics and context as anecdotal evidence can point to an issue but it is often on shaky ground. Looking at the statement "I don't see Seismic Blast characters" as an example piece of feedback does not tell us much on it's own aside from one player's observation. This statement could have some supporting evidence behind it though such as if the player also noted: "Out of 10 days, I was on 20 8-man teams and I observed Powersets ABC, but not D or E when looking at the 40 Ranged Archetypes observed across these teams" then it would carry much more weight.

They could even go above and beyond and bring up context of what may be causing the observed pattern:

From the public server status page (https://forums.homecomingservers.com/server-status/), at any given moment we can average 2000 players online.

We can assume that among the 2000, all 15 Archetypes are represented equally with about 133 players per Archetype.

Four of them can use Seismic Blast, bringing the portion up to 532 players / 2000 = about 27%

Of that 27%, there is a 1/14 chance that a player is using Seismic Blast if we assume all are played equally.

This translates to a 1.9% chance that a player you run into will be using Seismic Blast.

These odds are likely higher in practice due to the distribution of Archetypes, if you only see those who can use Blast Powersets that is a 1/14 or 7.1% chance to see any particular set.

The fact that I saw no Seismic Blast Characters across 40 Ranged Archetypes leads me to believe it may not be a popular choice.

This would be something I would personally pay close attention to given the player showed they went out of their way to investigate and provide objective feedback that showed their work.

Consistently paying attention to detail, clearly communicating your points, and working with others to support your feedback in a similar objective manner will provide excellent material for the Development Team to work off of. Diving in to subjective arguments with one another is an excellent way to cloud feedback and make it more difficult to actually test and make changes for other players and Developers alike.

Please remember that we are all working on this game out of passion for it. Passion can be an incredible fuel source for vitriol, but also for greatness. Keep in mind that there are certain realities that cannot always be readily communicated due to forces out of our control, but for what we can control there are methods that can get better results than others. Let's all keep improving.

Thank you for this response and explanation. I have a few responses, that are in no way meant as contradictions to anything you say, but things to consider for the context of this discussion.

Polling: You can very easily use multiple free, simple to use polling applications that would allow for ranked choice voting, ratings, and even leave some blank feedback slots for concerns that can accommodate thousands of responses. These do NOT need to show ANY results of the polling to the people taking them, so no one would have any idea what the results were, how close they were, etc., and the Devs could, with a web browser scan across an easy to read page, examine the results from several different angles. Google Forms takes about 10 minutes to set up and a simple link can be made public that allows anyone to answer it. It's not scientific polling, but it would allow for a fairly useful gauge of interest, etc. If any of the Devs are interested I would be fully open to meeting over Zoom or something and helping show you your options and how to use them. Just food for thought.

Feedback: I totally hear you and agree, which is why I try to qualify statements like I did about seismic, etc. I feel that most of the actual feedback in the Storm Blast Focused Feedback thread didn't just use anecdotes, but tried to use numbers, causes, etc. I know I personally even tried rerolling with different secondary sets and archetypes to see if some concerns were specific to my first go round. Most of the people I saw did the same. Maybe we could find a way to try and more forcefully cut down on the meta-posts that were about other posts, not feedback, more strictly. I mean, sometimes posts about the ideas of other posts is also valid feedback, so it's tricky, but I do think there was a lot of good feedback lost in the bickering.

On Dev investment: For the record, I do really recognize this and appreciate it. It's actually my primary reason for the push for polling before development really gets going and for clearly explaining timelines to testers. As a creator, I can fully relate to the intellectual commitment and emotional investment you get as you work on a project. When it's out for testing and suddenly someone wants major changes, that can be frustrating and absolutely outside of the vision you've spent hours upon hours on. But...that doesn't mean it's the wrong change. More eyes are usually better. Not more cooks, but more tasters, if you need a bad analogy. Getting some feedback ahead of time, and having a little more time with more people testing where the set still has the ability to be "reshaped" in real ways is probably a good idea for the Devs, too. It takes some of the pressure off of them, and in my experience, has you putting out a product that, if it isn't better, is more comforting because you know it wasn't just your baby being tossed out. It was the best everyone could come up with. And again, I just want to reiterate, I'm not saying that as if you all aren't already trying to have that mindset. As a tester this time, my experience was different than in the past, and frustrating for me, personally, though, so I thought I'd share some ideas for improvement.

But seriously, thanks for the lengthy and thoughtful response.

April 27, 2023

2 hours ago, EmperorSteele said:

The whole part lamenting how small, tiny, and limited the alpha and beta testing segements are, and then suggesting that the playerbase be polled concerning ideas before the devs ever do anything? In the first post of the thread? It sure SOUNDS like you want more cooks in the kitchen, ready to Yay or Nay ideas in their infancy.

That is NOT what you accused me of saying, though. You accused me of wanting " to emulate thunderspy's "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" approach"

Saying that more people should have input before something is released to help catch problems and refine the design has nothing to do with "throwing everything at the wall." In point of fact, it's the exact opposite. It's making sure only things that really are the most efficient, desired, and polished they can be are tossed at the wall.

April 26, 2023

1 hour ago, Captain Fabulous said:

I stopped posting and deleted my own posts because I had it up to my eyeballs with the constant whining about how no one was paying attention to the changes you were demanding.

Evidence that you're just being dishonest:

In that post I say "the Devs have been listening" and making tweaks and changes. I am not "whining about how no one was paying attention to my demands. I

In fact, I posted THIS post also, thanking the Devs for the changes they DID make to duration and VFX on Storm Cell. Booper, specifically, was amazing at going back and forth with our concerns to the Devs.

We were doing EXACTLY what the Forums said we should be doing, and while you KEEP SAYING that it was brought here pretty much ready to go and we were only supposed to look for bug fixes, we were told by Booper the exact opposite, and also that you really should stop commenting about how annoying our ideas were to you.

And I quote: "The set does not come to Brainstorm ready to go. We don't do business that way. We are always looking at the feedback and trying to find ways to improve on the set that keeps balance in a good spot. This is a good place to get fresh eyes on a subject in hopes of identifying concerns that were overlooked during the internal development phase and closed beta phase.

For example, a few days ago I pitched an idea to address a concern that I felt had a lot of merit. A 90s cooldown on Storm Cell may be too harsh on a low level character (where enhancement slots and other sources of recharge buffs are very limited). The overwhelming response was a 40s fixed cooldown was not desirable, so I didn't pursue that option. But that is still an example where we are listening to the feedback from both test servers and trying to find solutions to problems that we agree need to be addressed."

And lets not pretend you ALSO weren't repeatedly asking for the things you wanted, which were VFX changes.

April 26, 2023

4 hours ago, Bionic_Flea said:

I didn't have time to test the Storm blast changes before now, although I did try to follow the feedback threads.

But I did roll a storm/storm corr last night and got him to just shy of 30 running DFBs and the TFC task forces. It seems to be about middle of the road to me. It does not appear to be "OMG it's terrible" or "OMG it's the best" at least the way I am playing it.

Regarding testing in general: I sympathize with folks who tried something out, voiced concerns, and those concerns weren't addressed. I have certainly been in that group before and it's not pleasant. But I also realize that just because things don't change the way I want them to doesn't necessarily mean that I was ignored. Rather, the devs may disagree or may want to see it in the wild with many players trying out crazy combos before seeing whether a change really needs to be made.

I have also been one whose suggestions have been taken a time or two and been accused of being some kind of insider or teacher's pet or something. *Shrug* As my wife tells me, I'm always wrong so I should just get used to it. But I prefer to rage, rage against the dying of the light.

First off, HI FLEA!!!!

Second, I think what you're going to find is that any combo that requires an active secondary becomes a problem. For Storm Cell and Cat 5 to actually work at even close to full potential you have to be amping them up with your main attacks. When you're using your secondary attacks, Storm Cell's procs aren't being triggered. So using secondary powers automatically reduces the damage of your two main primary powers. Plus you have issues with lock out, accuracy, etc, on Storm Cell. It makes the set unenjoyable outside of a few secondaries that allow for more passive play (obviously, in some people's opinion since this is subjective). Storm Secondary essentially covers this up, because once you launch Tornado, Freezing Rain, and Lighting cloud you can just constantly focus on your primary set, so it will perform at its most optimal state (which, as you say, is still just middling). But pair it with an active secondary and suddenly Storm Cell is doing FAR less damage debuffing, and Hurricane is slower to amp up and does less damage. Also, at higher levels, Storm Cell is really going to struggle with harder to hit targets because it's a pseudo-pet with 1.0 accuracy.

It can work. And it is a BEAUTIFUL set. I'm going to try out a Storm Blast/Devices Blaster and see if I can get some better results since Devices is a passive secondary for the most part and I can focus on keeping Storm Blast optimized as gun drone and caltrops help boost its damage output. But I don't think a good set should be restricted to just a few secondary sets or penalize you for wanting your secondary to be an active part of your play.

Anyway...I'm off topic. This will probably be my last post and I'll just say, I think the Devs should be open to looking at refining the testing process. You can keep deadlines, scope restrictions, etc. That doesn't have to change. But perhaps bring them from Alpha to Beta here earlier, to give more time for a wider set of feedback. Or come up with an Alpha 2.0 here that allows feedback before it gets to Beta for debugging, which still is open to a general pop that can give more feedback. And I really cant stress enough the benefit of actually engaging players before you start big projects and listening to their suggestions and ideas about your vision for that project. You just need to do it non-publicly to avoid the chaos and flame wars some players like to engage in.

April 26, 2023

8 minutes ago, Captain Fabulous said:

You're clearly thinking of someone else because I did nothing of the sort. All I did was remind people the things they were repeatedly asking for ad nauseum weren't going to happen. Or that things they claimed didn't work actually worked just fine. Not because it was my opinion but because we were told by the devs they weren't going to change. My frustration came from those who ignored it and kept blathering on even after they were asked by multiple people to stop repeating the same things over and over and over again.

And here we are with y'all STILL complaining about how you were ignored, the system is broken, blah blah blah.

I mean, you know people can actually still go read the thread, right? Except, of course, all your posts that the devs deleted and said were the problem.

*shrug*

April 26, 2023

6 hours ago, Number Six said:

And as for storm blast, I agree with the team's consensus that while it's early days, we're pretty happy with the performance of the set in practice so far.

It's not top DPS in every situation, and in no universe should it be. It does decent damage and is fun to play.

A set that's fun to play despite not being the best at absolutely everything and not slavishly used automatically by min/maxers is every build is in absolutely no way a failure in our book.

I'm curious: what data do you use for "fun to play." The Focused Feedback thread had several people who said that they really wanted to like it, and loved the animations, but in actual play it was =not= fun because of the flaws. And I don't recall any of them being about pure DPS, so that's a red herring. But seriously...what metric did you use to decide "fun to play"? How many people found the set good to go versus had problems?

April 26, 2023

6 hours ago, Number Six said:

You don't need to give people an excuse. Sure there are other issues that would make testing more difficult (though not impossible, once we were in open beta we have others who can absolutely run the merging and build process if you got hit by a truck, even if they normally prefer not to). But even if there weren't, setting deadlines and sticking to them is a Very Good Thing.

If there's one thing we've learned about the development team that has been assembled from the community and is continuing to grow, it's that scope creep can be a real problem, and if we want to get more than 2 major releases out a year, we need to set goals and deadlines and reasonable standards, and not get caught up in trying to make everything perfect before release.

This is PRECISELY why asking for player input before you set the goals of a page would be helpful. Some of the issues that come up would have been addressed before you even began.
And as I said, a simple Google Form would take 10 minutes to set up and poll people about their feelings and feedback on a concept/direction you're thinking of, and if the results are private, you won't get a single page of bickering or forum fighting.

Just something to think about.

April 26, 2023

6 hours ago, Faultline said:

As Shade indicated, the deadline was set by me because starting today I have a series of appointments for a ton of immigration-related paperwork that are very time intensive and I'm unlikely to be able to give COH the required attention for the next few weeks; small patches is fine to fix issues, but the big page publish definitely needed to be yesterday.

Understandable, but in the future, it would be nice to know the deadlines as testers, since some of us are taking time out of our days to purposefully test things with various iterations, datamine, etc. It would be helpful for all of us, AND probably the Devs, if we all knew the deadline we were working for so expectations could be realistic for all sides.

April 26, 2023

3 hours ago, Captain Fabulous said:

Just because they don't implement every suggestion made, and that a powerset ends up being not exactly what YOU want it to be doesn't mean they don't listen. It just means what they want the set to be is different than what you want it to be. And that's OK. No one is ever going to like everything.

The main goal of beta testing is to find bugs, make small adjustments, and to test changes the devs might be on the fence about. If they tell us up front that things are unlikely to change in any significant way the frustration you feel is your own fault for having the hubris to believe you know better, that they're somehow obligated to make changes because you and a few forum randos whined endlessly for 24 pages, or that they're incompetent because they don't.

Yesterday while playing my new Storm/Storm Corruptor I saw people playing Seismic Blast, Symphony Control, and Electrical Affinity. Just because YOU don't see them doesn't mean people aren't playing and enjoying them.

This is hilarious coming from you. You were LITERALLY attacking several of us pointing out the very demonstrable, numericly backed problems this set faced because you said it was fine and wanted it out right away. That's not my take, that's your words. -YOU- were the only one demanding the set be what you want. You literally had your posts deleted for being off topic by attacking others. None of my posts got deleted. And as I posted above, the very first thread on the testing page says that ARE open to changes. If that's not correct, that needs to be changed.

Also...I'm hardly a "rando". I've been with this community, in all its forms, probably longer than you have.

April 26, 2023

7 hours ago, EmperorSteele said:

I think the problem with OPs suggestions are that they fall into a "too many cooks" situation. Letting people whos only contribution would be reactionary opinions aid in development would be a TERRIBLE idea.

And while I'm very aware of Power Creep and the need to keep it under control, the powers devs do seem to lean towards being a bit too cautious.

But either way, I think the HC devs are doing a good enough job that we don't need to emulate thunderspy's "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" approach, as OP seems to want.

Please cite where I every said anything that implies this.

Because I most decidedly did not.

April 26, 2023

3 hours ago, Shadeknight said:

Given that they've only made Electrical Affinity, Seismic Blast, Symphony Control, and now Storm Blast? I'd say all of them. Used means even a few people play them, but perhaps we differ in definitions. Subjectivity is fun like that! Of those, I think the least played by my experience is Seismic but your experience differs from that.

Back in 2013 by entirely different developers. We do not have the exact same developers as SCORE/The Secret Server. Apples to Oranges.

Then a: Out of 3 previous sets, only one gets regularly played. That's not a great record (though we have no actual data on this so we can't know for sure)
b: IF that's true, then these developers should be taking a page from those ones. This system is serious flawed, for the reasons I pointed out.

April 26, 2023

1 hour ago, Shadeknight said:

Now, I'm going to preface this with: I have Closed Tested a couple of things and am part of the open-invite Tester Discord (I've posted it several times and I'll post it again if asked) - so I have a very very clear bias. I am also speaking from a general standpoint of what I've seen / what I know from being in the tester Discord. I can't really speak onto why the devs didn't "listen" to certain voices regarding Storm Blast. You'd have to get an answer directly from them.

Page 5 and Page 6 both fall under a new pattern of feature-locking deadlined releases. This is in part because we only have one person who can push these patches out. Now, they could change that but I imagine that's not the quickest or easiest solution. Faultline has had a very shit show of his life when traveling abroad, and isn't always going to be there. So 5 & 6 were given deadlines and feature locks. They did not want, to my understanding, massive pages that kept getting more features. This is why it may feel sub-par, but its hardly that in my opinion.

No. Not a chance in hell after prior pages should this be done. People do not have the ability to think critically or reign themselves in - within a broad sense of 'people' and this is not our server in the developmental sense. Now, we have had feedback change things in both the Closed Beta (where we're under a loose trust situation to NOT share what we're testing) AND in Open Beta. However, polling does not in any circumstance work. It has never worked in my experience with it and game development, and trying it out after prior pages and the insane amount of Patch Note Reactors? No. By all that is holy no.

Paragon Studios vs a bunch of volunteers is not a good comparison to make. Savage Melee was not a HC creation. The standards of a paid company do not need to be upheld by 3 (so far as I know) volunteers doing the Power Development.

A: The polling I'm talking about is about the general public's reception to major ideas: things like Storm Cell and how it could function, for example. Do most players WANT a power that works that way, etc. Polling what the public would like before you personally get invested as the developer is EXACTLY the way to develop new products in an established player base, and I say this as someone whose Masters thesis was, partly, related to MMO design and communication. You don't poll on every detail, but you ask the general public opinions like "If X powerset were made, which design would be most interesting to you- A, B, or C?" "What problems do you forsee with design issue A? B? C?" etc. The results don't even need to be public. The polls can easily be done via Forms to give the DEVS the feedback while making users' comments and ideas not seeable by the playerbase. This would allow Devs to get an idea about the general reception and possible oversights of their vision for a set. Is it really a good one to the general population, etc. This would be BEFORE they put in the work of coding, AND present them with possible problems to avoid ahead of time in their design. You know...problems like designing an entire set around a key power and a tier 9 that require you to focus exclusively on your primary attacks if you want them to do their full damage. Ramping up is a cool idea, but it has a serious design flaw that could have been fixed if they'd have had more people looking earlier on. *shrug*

B: Savage Melee was not finished by Paragon Studios. It was tested and finished by people in this community, and went through several major changes as we did. And the set is much better for it.

C : If there is a clear deadline where no changes can be made, the testers here should be notified. It's a waste of -our- time having us spend two hours testing out a new combo tonight to see if there really is a problem, or what the solution could be, if they're already launching as is tomorrow morning at 6 AM. And if they don't plan on any changes during beta testing here besides bug fixes, they should make that clear as well. I feel this current system is unintentionally inconsiderate to the player base outside of the alpha test server, and even some of us on that server are here testing it and possibly wasting our time.

April 25, 2023

3 minutes ago, biostem said:

You have to differentiate between a "Closed Beta" and an "Open Beta". What we have here is more akin to the latter, where anyone can try out the new stuff and provide feedback. This means that large sweeping changes are unlikely to happen. If we're thinking "pie in the sky" sort of stuff, then ideally we'd have alpha, then a closed beta, where a larger, but still exclusive group, was able to test the changes, provide feedback that could involve major overhauls, then the open beta, where anyone can try, but things will only receive minor tweaks, before going live...

This is a major problem then, in my opinion, as someone who has access to both open Alpha and closed beta testing, and it's resulting in sub-par releases.

April 25, 2023

19 minutes ago, biostem said:

The question is what is the goal for the beta period of testing - if it is merely to elicit feedback with the intent of only performing minor tweaks to the set, then no amount of "scrap this and go back to the drawing board" is going to be heeded, and only those providing the kind of feedback the devs are seeking, will be listened to.

I think this is correct, but it's also very indicative of the problem. But if you look at the first link on the Beta testing forum, it's this:

2. BE CONSTRUCTIVE. Going on about how the devs are idiots and you have the One True Vision for the game is not helpful; trying to engage with the changes and the reasons given is."

That assumed they should be open to changes, but go read the thread for Storm Blast, where multiple alpha testers and others say the set was pretty much set in stone how the devs wanted it before coming here, a dev said that wasn't necessarily true, then multiple users pointed out the same problems with the set (big, set breaking problems, not minor ones) and with no warning it was just published live with no dev feedback. That strongly implies it IS true.

April 25, 2023

Two things: Audio in cinematics and...

Endurance goes away for ever. It's an outdated concept that serves no real purpose. Recharge is all you should be worrying about when it comes to keeping players from using powers too often, and honestly, this is proven by the fact that we now almost ALL use procs to make endurance a non-issue by the mid 30s. It's a holdover from everquest that you don't find outside of MMOs, and many modern MMOs don't have it either.

April 25, 2023

As someone who tried hard to take part in beta testing Storm Blast, and for brief second having it seem like the Devs were actually listening to concerns of the players, I have to say, this whole system on this server needs an update.

I know there's the Alpha testing server first hand. But I also know how small that group is. They're great people, but they're a tiny fraction of players.

So when a new powerset gets to Beta here, and is largely "done" without some minor tweaks, it's really frustrating. Frankly, with the problems identified with Storm Blast and having it pushed out the door like it was with no real warning, it makes me feel like there's no real point in beta testing. The decisions have been made by the gods of this server, praise be their name.

I would REALLY prefer it if, for future powersets, you change your approach. Frankly, if the next set you're planning on doing was, say, Wind Control, I'd REALLY like it if you actually took your idea, polled the players on their thoughts of the direction before development, and after development, brought it to Beta here WITHOUT a firm commitment to have it launch "soon" and have the concept locked down in stone. There were some real problems identified with the design of Storm Cell and Cat 5, and some good solutions posed. There were so many posts by a couple of other players attacking people for daring to point out those problems on a set "so close to done" that deletions had to occur, then a few minor tweaks to numbers and animations that don't address those concerns brought up, and then no warning that it was about to go live so further testing and brainstorming solutions was a waste of OUR time.

This is NOT the way things used to be. I remember when Savage Melee was being tested and the Devs really listened, tweaked, and fixed what a lot of the problems with the set's design. It didn't become a tier 1 set, but it became better. And they took their time and listened. The approach I saw here with Storm Blast is also a different approach from what I see of the writing and contact development here too, where feedback seems to be listened to much better.

Well, this time, I don't know what the rush is, but I feel like I just wasted a week of my free time testing something for no real reason. Cool.

You could have had one of the most beautiful sets in a long time be actually playable. Now, it's a slog fest that is a chore to play at LEAST until the 30s, and then once you hit the high levels really struggles by its design against the kinds of enemies you face. But hey...it's out, so I guess it doesn't matter. But I'm disappointed and annoyed at how this whole thing was handled.

April 25, 2023

8 hours ago, WindDemon21 said:

Or remove the lockouts..

Removing the lockouts would help, but it doesn't alter the "tax" this set imposes on the use of your secondary powers, which no other set in the game has. The fact that the set is relatively weak without Storm Cell and Cat 5 at full strength only makes that tax heavier.

Lemme show you a comparison between this set and Ice Blast:

Side by Side comparison
Power (Ice)	Cast time	DMG	Power (Storm)	Cast Time	DMG
Ice Bolt	1 sec	62.56	Gust	1.17	75.07 (DoT)
Ice Blast	1.67	102.6	Hail Stones	1.67	102.60 (DoT)
Frost Breath	2.67	87.59 (DoT)	Jet Stream	1.67	50.05
Aim	---	---	Storm Cell	2.03	Dependent on cont. attacks from primary
Freeze Ray	1.0	137.64	Intensify	----	-----
Ice Storm	2.03	116.78 (DoT)	Direct Strike (snipe)	3.33	281.53
Bitter Ice Blast	1.07	142.64	Chain Lightning	1.17	76.45 (DoT)
Bitter Freeze Ray	172.67	2.5	Cloud Burst	1.67	142.33
Blizzard	2.03	417.8 (DoT)	Category 5	2.5	316.98 (Dependent on cont. attacks from primary)

As you can see above, Storm Cell has a lot less direct damage potential, especially in regard to hard hitting attacks, outside of Storm Cell and Cat 5. It does include the snipe, but otherwise, it only has -ONE- other attack that does over 110 points of damage, and only has two other "AoE" powers (Chain Lightning and Jet Stream), both of which aren't big damage numbers themselves outside of the storm cell. That really means you need to up the damage of Storm Cell and keep it up and get Cat 5 amped up as quick as possible. Which makes using your secondary powers a detriment.

So lets look at that in real world action against an AV or Pylon, etc. We'll go with Dark Manip Secondary.

With Ice Blast, I can toss Ice Storm And Blizzard which immediately start dealing their full damage potential and debuffs, and then cycle through Freeze Ray (137), Bitter Ice Blast (142), Bitter Freeze Ray (172.67) and then throw in Midnight Grasp (180) . When necessary for end or damage boost, I could use Soul Drain and Dark Consumption. In cycles where I'm not using Soul Drain or Dark Consumption, I'd do a total of 631.67 dmg per cycle OUTSIDE of my AoEs with no penalty to their total damage/debuff output. And honestly, the SMART attack chain would be to START with Soul Drain because then ALL of those attacks are doing a TON more damage in the fight.

With Storm Blast, I can toss Storm Cell and Cat 5, which don't start doing thier real damage until I start attacking with primaries. So I start...But I really only have three attacks over 100 dmg points to cycle through: Direct Strike (180 since it would be fast cast), Cloud Burst (142.33), and Hail Stones (102). I cycle through those but then if I add in Midnight Grasp (180) that weakens my Storm Cell since it doesn't trigger the additional attacks. And I assume three primary attacks are enough to full ramp up Cat 5? I dont quite know how to tell. Oh, and lets not forget that if I'm fighting an AV, there's a lock out between attacks from the cell anyway, so while Ice Storm continues to pelt away at him, Storm Cell and Cat 5 may not. Now, If I start with Soul Drain after I drop the Storm Cell to boost the damage of the rest of my attacks up front, my storm cell isn't doing anything, and Cat 5 isn't amping up either. So I probably won't do that, because I'd be aggroing the whole mob then stand there for 5 seconds dropping Storm Cell and Cat 5 with no real damage going on. So I take Soul Drain out of the equation till later in the fight, at which point it is, again, seconds where I'm not getting the full benefit of Storm Cell as I use it. So in this method I have somewhere around 30-40 less pts of dmg per cycle, but also less AoE damage going because unlike Ice storm and Hurricane, my AoEs require me boosting them with my other attacks, and I'm taking time out of that to use the heaviest hitter I have from my secondary since my primary really only has 2. I suppose, theoretically, you could use the secondary powers during the "lock outs" where those powers cant hit the AV, but it's impossible to tell when that is or plan for that since the powers are, by design, "chance of" anyway.

The point is, the set is already mild WITHOUT Storm Cell and Cat 5 being full strength, so if you go into your secondary for anything it feels like it just makes you weaker. And based on my experience, while this is OK against normal mobs and the visuals and chaos are fun, against harder targets like AVS it really suffers. This is why I REALLY think the primary attacks boosts to Storm Cell need to "linger" even after the attack, giving you a chance to do other things without feeling like it's wasting potential there. I really think an "Intensified" effect like "bloom" would help, and get rid of the lockout.

Now...there are some archetypes (Sentinels) and some secondary sets (Storm) that can make up for this but doing their thing on their own and freeing you up to totally focus on boosting Storm Cell and Cat 5, but I don't think we want a powerset that really locks you into a very limited set of options to perform as well as most other sets can generally, do we?

April 24, 2023

Ok, so I rerolled, thinking maybe my concerns with end and complexity were due to being a Corruptor with a secondary that really didn't offer any passive buffs. I decided to try Storm Blast/Energy Manip Blaster, because I thought it had the best ways to mitigate my concerns with the set from previous testing: it offered excellent endurance cost reduction, allowed for an AoE Stun that would help with the Cat 5 mitigation issue, and even allowed for Boost Range so I could stay far away from Storm Cell and Cat 5 and blast from a distance where it should lower incoming damage. I levelled it up to level 50, fully slotted with sets that I would usually slot with, used Mace Master patron pool for the added defense which would pair well with power boost, and had alpha slotted to tier 4 so I was actually 50 (+1) and ran the first Maria Jenkins mission at +2x4, which is a very normal for even a mid tier build at that level.

The end cost of Storm cell WAS better. It didn't bother me much at all at that level. So that's good. And I was able to clear through the mobs rather easily by starting off dropping Storm Cell, then using boost range +power boost and stun to stun the mobs, then dropping Cat 5 and attacking with storm cell attacks. It wasn't "fast" but it worked, and relatively safely. Slower and more difficult than most blaster primaries, where you quickly nova and then clean up the stragglers and hard hitters, but it was working and I could see me doing it on a character on live.

When it came to the AV, I faceplanted twice. I never got him below about 80% HP. But it's an AV, and I wasn't as experienced with this set as normal, so maybe I just needed to slow down, right? So...I lowered the difficulty to +1x4, so even con with me. And I still faceplanted twice. I really couldn't handle the AV. The problem I kept finding was the same as before: there is a DEFINITE tax on Storm Cell AND Cat 5, and it goes beyond the Endurance cost which is the problem at low levels. There is also a tax on the use of your secondary powers.

Storm Cell and Cat 5 require you to keep spamming your primary attacks for them to really do damage, which you need desperately against higher level enemies since none of the single target attacks are actually very powerful. They look AWESOME, but they're almost all DoT and not really heavy hitters. Every time I went to use a secondary power like Stun or Total Focus, I felt like I was losing damage because then Storm Cell wasn't doing anything but minor debuffing. "But how is that different than ANY powerset" you ask? Easy. If this were a normal AoE, I'd fire and it would do its full damage, regardless of what I do next. If I fire off Explosive Blast it does its full damage even if I switch to Ice Sword afterward, and then drop an Ice patch. If I drop Rain of Fire, it does its full damage even if my next attack is The Lotus Drops. With this set, if I take time to fire off a secondary attack, then Storm Cell's total damage output is lowered. It makes using secondary powers of ANY kind cost more than just their end cost. They cost damage loss from the AoE attack in your primary. And if you have Cat 5 going too, it's even worse. That's a problem. A big one, for me at least. Defenders, who struggle to do damage as it is, now have a primary that does even less damage if they stop to heal someone or buff them etc.

:My final thoughts: as of now, anyway, are that the set's design is really cool, but really flawed. If it was either cat 5 OR storm cell that had the weird mechanic tied to the other attacks it might be bearable; but with BOTH of them requiring your other attacks for THEM to really function to their potential, it makes the set more difficult to utilize fully and makes your secondary powers feel like a burden to use that costs you. Right now, I'd skip this set on live for anything other than a role player toon, or maybe a sentinel that has a secondary armor set that doesn't require any active power use.

Changes I suggest are needed:

1. Storm Cell REALLY needs to be different in how it functions. If you really want to have it tied to your other attacks, have an attack in storm cell work sort of like "bloom" in Nature. Each attack in the cell creates a stack of Intensity that lasts for 5 seconds, which triggers the storm to start attacking. Each stack increases the storm's attack rate, accuracy, and debuff power. The more stacks you have the higher the damage/debuff of the storm. Have it cap at 4 stacks of "intensity" which gives maximum attack rate and debuff, and I'd suggest making that maximum be about 10-20% higher than current levels would be if you spammed attacks. Then have Intensify version of AIM grant the normal To Hit and Damage bonus, and 4 stacks of Intensity to the player. This way you still can lay the storm without aggro until you start attacking, but once you start, you can still throw in secondary powers as you fight without the storm then becoming useless while you do. This would also allow lower levels to use things like blue insps, or end boost powers, etc. while the storm keeps attacking so you aren't feeling like you've left some of the damage on the table or let mobs get away while you do. You can pace your attacks better without feeling like Storm Cell is weakening instantly.

2. Some of the single target attacks need to hit harder, and it needs fewer DoTs. There is no way to take down an AV with this set right now, which is crazy to me on a blaster. When you have a lock out on the attacks from Storm Cell and rest of your attacks attacks aren't hard hitters, the AVs can just regen faster than you can dish out damage unless you're using powers your secondary which deal more damage, only as discussed above, that means storm cell isn't doing any damage while you do so, so you basically end up with NO heavy hitters in your primary against these kinds of targets.

I think if you did these two things, it would probably be OK. Right now, for me, it really just isn't fun...and damn do I want it to be, because I love the visuals and concept.

I'm sorry, I'm sure this is frustrating to hear this this close to launch, but it's my experience, and I've tried it now on several combinations and multiple archetypes and keep coming back to the same problems.

April 23, 2023

That worked, thanks. I just went ahead and made a macro for it.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Events

Store

Articles

Patch Notes

Posts posted by Puma