[Nerfs getting out of hand (humor)]

You folks are doing it wrong. Nerfs never exist in isolation. They have to be multiple.

 

So, if the only thing wrong with an AoE attack was that it did too much damage, then you'd do one of the following.

• Reduce the damage AND the radius.
• Reduce the damage AND increase the recharge.

It's never just one thing.

 

So, with that said...

Page 6

• Procs now fire less frequently, and for less damage.
• Achilles' Heel and Fury of the Gladiator have been changed to PPM of 1.5 and 7.5% -res value
• Annihilation has been changed to PPM of 1.5 and 5% -res value.
• Gaussian now gives a 50% damage buff and is now 0.33PPM
• Forced Feedback now gives 20% recharge buff and is 0.25PPM
• All epic attacks have a larger internal recharge value that they use to decrease their proc rate. Also their endurance cost has been increased across the board.
• Ground Zero has had its target cap reduced to 10 (16 on tankers) and now has a larger recharge.
• Spin has had its radius reduced, and recharge increased. (No change to proc rate.)
• The meteor farm map has had its spawn number reduced in size AND has been flagged to award 25% XP.

 

 

[Next Up - S/L Farms]

24 minutes ago, Krimson said:

I only have two accounts. It's all I need. Farmers on both so I can make what I want when I want. Most of my activity is made for one active farmer doing the heavy lifting. On rare occasions, I can drag the alt along to help with aura spam. That's happened like twice on 27 toons. Triple boxing is never going to happen. But I do things like front load patrol farms, and then wipe out half the mobs at the first choke point, then reset the farm because running around from place to place is not DPS.

 

Yes, there are a lot of other logistics involved. Meanwhile, I'm getting my "Let's make a 50" time back closer to two hours with one farmer and one alt. I don't care about getting the best possible XP and INF returns because running two accounts is enough of a hassle let alone three. That's right, I'd rather farm a little longer than mess with multiple accounts. But it's not even a race unless your slotted 50s are just there for decoration. 

 

Anyhow, this isn't even a serious thread to begin with. There is no Smashing/Lethal farm community the way there is a Fire Farm community. There's a hand full of individuals. We've been doing it for years, but people only notice the Meta. 

 

Ah you only used two accounts?

 

With only two accounts active, fire farmers could earn 160.8mil an hour in Page 4.  (Just influence, not drops/etc).

 

Were you making that?

[Next Up - S/L Farms]

51 minutes ago, Krimson said:

Players THINK Fire was the Meta because players are beholden to Fire. The reason being is because the bar for entry is low. Fire Armor is super easy to cap Fire Resistance. Smashing/Lethal takes a bit more work. You don't have multiple Winter sets just waiting to help out. 

 

But Fire has never been superior to Smashing/Lethal. If you are crunching numbers in a database and doing your test farms in some linear fashion, then of course you are going to get mediocre results. No one knows how to tap S/L properly. They just think of it as some sort of variation of Fire with more common damage. Nevermind that S/L has multiple sets to choose from. For one, I don't see a lot of AE builders taking mob ratios into consideration. Sure, focus on balancing those individual Minions, Lieutenants, and Bosses, but don't think of their make up as a whole. By having certain numbers of different types of mobs, you can get better yields because you just have more bosses. Thankfully, the good ones like Big Gotter do realize that. 

 

But it's not just how you make your mobs that can affect your outcome. My Orb guys have a smidge less than 100% XP and yet overall XP gain is faster than if I tried to perfectly optimize them. If my guy gives 10% less XP and your guy takes 15% longer to kill.... 

 

Mob placement is another factor. Where are the mobs concentrated if at all? Can they be concentrated near choke points? Guess what happens when you combine maps with choke points and patrols? Hit the sweet spot and your Spreadsheet won't know what hit it. 

 

Other considerations are playstyle. The One-Mob-at-a-Time farmer will get consistent returns for sure. But More Risk=More Reward. Such as... negotiating patrols in a choke point. It's like Pokemon. Gotta Aggro 'Em all. And the best part is, thanks to Page 4, they don't just walk away anymore. Woo! Everyone in line of sight is a target until they are dead. Woo!

 

So anyhow. Yeah there was sure some nice Fire Farms, and the newer ones for Page 5 aren't too shabby either. Smashing/Lethal needs love. 😄 I'll give tips to builders one on one, but don't expect much more from me. 

 

I don't get into online debates about farming. I just look at the raw numbers. All that matters is how much inf/xp you can earn per hour.

Were you earning more than 214 million inf per hour triple boxing s/l farms in Page 4? (Just influence, not drops/etc).

 

Because that's how much fire farmers were earning.

 

[Page 7 Farming Microguide (Maps + Builds)]

Thank ye!

[Next Up - S/L Farms]

1 hour ago, Krimson said:

There's lots. It's always been viable. Players are just beholden to Fire. I've tried to form group or drum up interest. I run into farmers sporadically, so for the most part I just do it on my own. Not to mention there's a small subset who THINK they are running S/L by running a Council farm. 

 

Until Page 5, fire farming was the most viable option in terms of influence earned per minute. (The only metric that matters.)

 

Since the Burn nerf, the earning potential has shifted to S/L farming:

Active:

• 1 Active Rad/Fire Brute + 2 AFK Rad/Fire Brutes = ~156mil p/h
• 1 Active Rad/SS Tank + 2 AFK Elec/Rad Tanks = ~174mil p/h

AFK:

• 3x AFK Rad/Fire Brutes = 95.4mil p/h
• 3x AFK Elec/Rad Tanks = 99.0mil p/h

Like I said, there's not a lot in it. Especially AFK.

See here for a more detailed breakdown:
 

 

 

 

[Devs, please explain why you are nerfing one of the most popular activities on Homecoming]

Posted up the Page 4 vs Page 5 farming numbers for those curious:

 

 

[Next Up - S/L Farms]

S/L farms are actually more viable now. But there's not much in it.

[Page 7 Farming Microguide (Maps + Builds)]

Saw a bunch of posts in General Discussions saying farming is nerfed. So though I'd run the numbers to check.

 

Active 1 Account

Page 4: Rad/Fire Brute = 108mil p/h

Page 5: Rad/Fire Brute = 92.6mil p/h

 

So roughly 85% as effective as before.

 

Solution: Switch to a Rad/SS tank and S/L farm. They can still clear meteor maps in 3:00. Which is 100% as effective as before.

 

AFK 1 Account:

Page 4: Rad/Fire Brute = 52.8mil p/h

Page 5: Rad/Fire Brute = 31.8mil/) p/h

 

So roughly 60% as effective as before.

 

Solution: Best I've been able to find is Elec/Rad tank. That pulls in ~33mil p/h. Which is roughly 63% as effective as before.

 

Triple-Box 3 Accounts

Page 4: 1 Active Rad/Fire Brute + 2 AFK Rad/Fire Brutes = ~214mil p/h

Page 5: 1 Active Rad/SS Tank + 2 AFK Elec/Rad Tanks = ~174mil p/h

 

So, roughly 81% of what it was in Page 4. (Mainly due to AFK Farming taking a big hit.)

 

AFK 15 Accounts

15 AFK Rad/Fire Brutes in Page 4: 792mil p/h

15 AFK Elec/Rad Tanks in Page 5: 495mil p/h

 

So, roughly 63% of what it was Page 4.

 

--

 

So, pretty big drops across the board for fire farming. Single-account active s/l farming with a Rad/SS Tank is still viable. (But considering that Ground Zero having a target cap of 30 is a big reason for this, we're only one bug fix away from that going away. Could happen anytime. So probably best to stick to the Rad/Fire Brutes for now.)

 

The above numbers all rely on proc builds. So if procs get nerfed in a future update, farming will take another big hit.

 

That said, despite the above, farming still rewards more inf p/h than other content. (Unless you're one of the 15-20 people in the game who can run 4* TFs in 20 minutes.) So for those who enjoy the playstyle, farming is still a valid option. If you're just into farming for the money (and three AFK characters pulling in 95-99mil an hour as you watch netflix isn't enough for you), then I'd suggest looking into marketeering.

 

New AFK Rad/Fire Brute build is attached. (Have also updated the OP with it.)
Elec/Rad AFK Tank is also attached. (With the tank, you don't need to toggle on Focused Accuracy).

The Active farming Rad/Fire in the OP is still good for Page 5.

 

Haven't attached the Active Rad/SS tank because it's a friends build so need to ask permission first. Essentially just proc out everything including GroundZero/Radiation Therapy, and build for 130% base recharge. With hasten and FF active you're looking at 300% recharge.

AA_AFK_Page5.mxd elec rad tank AFK Page 5.mxd

[Page 7 Farming Microguide (Maps + Builds)]

So far in testing my rad/fire brute is at ~3:30 and the rad/ss tank is at ~3:00. (Without using Lore on either.)

[Page 7 Farming Microguide (Maps + Builds)]

17 minutes ago, DarknessEternal said:

That's not very logical.  Rad armor can already cap out against Fire easier than against S/L, so if Rad Armor were more dps than Fire armor, it would have already been the choice.

I don't do forum debates when it comes to farming. I just look at ingame results.

 

From what I've seen active farming today ingame, it seems  my Rad/SS tank is clearing the asteroid faster than my rad/fire brute since the Burn/IG nerfs in Page 5.

 

Need to test a bunch more to confirm, though. But it looks like my suspicion might be correct. Will post the findings in this thread.

[Page 7 Farming Microguide (Maps + Builds)]

29 minutes ago, Aegipanos said:

Thank you for the voices of sanity and the good advice.

 

I'm following these guidelines and seeing the scale read 100% in the AE creator, but when I publish and go into my farm, my boss INF is the same as LT INF: 20,504 -- this is with them at lvl 54 and me set at +4/x8

 

I've just now tried your updated maps and I'm seeing the same: Angelbot v2.5 gives 20,504 inf and Angelbot v3.5 gives 20,504 inf. Is there a setting I'm missing? Something I'm doing wrong?

I just ran the mission on live to double check and got this:



Do you have bosses turned on in your difficulty settings? If not, then the bosses will spawn as LTs.

You can turn on bosses via the notoriety menu in the chatbox:

[Devs, please explain why you are nerfing one of the most popular activities on Homecoming]

For those interested:

 

 

[Page 7 Farming Microguide (Maps + Builds)]

All maps have been updated for Page 5. Will update the OP later to reflect this.

Using the rad/fire builds in the OP, active farming is pulling in 90% of what it was, and AFK farming is pulling in 40% of what it was.

Roughly translates to:
 

3x AFK farmers resetting every 5/10 mins = ~80 million inf per hour

1 x active farmer resetting every 3.5 mins + 2 x AFK farmers resetting every 5/10 mins = ~150 million inf per hour

 

Imagine Rad/Fire brutes aren't the go-to for AFK farming anymore. And there's probably better stuff to active farm with now. S/L farming with rad armor might be a better option now.

[A thank you spotlight - Philotic Knight]

2 hours ago, _NOPE_ said:

Mostly because people have been pinging me, and since I'm not a COMPLETE curmudgeon, I feel the need to read and respond. That will die down pretty quickly, I'm sure.

 

I just got this working today:

https://wiki.ourodev.com/view/I25_Community_Virtual_Machines#i26_Self_Installer

 

So, if I ever need a hit of that sweet CoH juice, I've got it now:

 

I **WILL** miss the community though. Thanks everyone.

Welcome back!

[A thank you spotlight - Philotic Knight]

He's not quit. He still logs into the forums every day:

 

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/profile/6005-_nope_/

[Farm nerfs]

6 hours ago, Snarky said:

I seriously used to take a level 1-50 in 3 hours like clockwork, just me solo.

In Page 4 this is still possible.

[UNfocused Feedback]

7 hours ago, Neiska said:

Here's my unfocused feedback. I too was once a staff member for a private server for nearly 10 years for another game. (Neverwinter nights 2 if anyone is wondering.)

 

Long story short - Over time our Dev team grew an "inner circle" of friends/acquaintances/special people who would form the unofficial "development team." In a sense, it was a group of people they personally knew apart from the unwashed masses whose input on changes carried more weight than anyone else's, simply because they "knew" those making the changes. But what this led to is a small handful of people who were not a part of the staff, having far more influence on server changes. But not just game mechanic changes, but server policies as well.

 

The point to all this is such an environment contributed to my decision to leave. And I believe if we aren't in a similar situation, then it is growing into one. Because if you go back and look through all the changes that have come to pass over 3 years recorded here in the forums, you might notice a pattern. I won't elaborate more than that due to forum policy. But people are certainly free to look for themselves.

 

I do want to highlight that I am not claiming this is the actual situation. Only similarities that I have noticed after spending quite a bit of time after this last Beta and spending a few hours combing the forums and looking for "trends" in "feedback" and the actual changes that have been implemented.

 

TLDR - Not a provable claim, but it is certainly beginning to feel like not everyone's feedback is equally weighed and valued, which can lead to people assuming some very bad things, even if they are utterly untrue. I am not saying this IS the case here, but it certainly is beginning to have the same atmosphere and vibe.

 

I think that's just how fan/pirate servers tend to operate. Dev teams usually spend all their free time developing and not playing. Because of this, they need players who regularly play the game to give feedback on what they're working on. (Especially in areas they're not super familiar with, such as PvP.) The consequence of this is that the players with the most free time tend to be the ones they end up speaking with the most. These players become known entities to the devs, and it can lead to a feeling of there being a "cool kids table" or "inner circle" to everyone else on the outside looking in. To those players, it creates the feeling of favouritism.

 

Now, that's obviously not a nice feeling to have. It gives the idea that certain players matter more than other players, which completely upsets the accepted hierarchy of Devs/GMs>Players. And furthermore, it can also make entire supergroups feel inferior when comparing themselves to others in that "Oh yeah, members of The Justice Brigade are always chatting to the devs" way. It removes the sense of equality that are essential for online groups to thrive.

 

I can't really think of a way to solve this, because it's a feeling people have. How do you solve a feeling? The reality is that everyone's feedback is listened to equally and closed beta testers just get theirs in first. But, if the perception is that "first = priority", then there's not much that can be said to counter that. Similarly, the reality is that, because everyone is able to join the closed beta, anyone feeling excluded has only themselves to blame. But then again, pointing out that anyone is welcome to come sit at the "cool kids table" doesn't get rid of the bad taste of there being a cool kids table in the first place.

I guess maybe some steps should be undertaken to ensure it's not perceived as a cool kids table? I dunno. All I can say is that, with the exception of PvP, nothing has been added to the game because closed beta testers have requested it. They, like you, are just giving feedback on something that the devs are planning on implementing. They have no power. If they did, the words "proc" and "nerf" would never appear together in any topic of conversation.

[Those darn Tier 9 armor powers]

/jranger.

 

They're useful in:

-Leveling 1-50

-Hardmode

-PvP

 

Remember, just because you don't have a use for them, doesn't mean other players aren't able to use them well.

[Sins of the Devs are visited upon the players]

 

[Thought experiment (AoE buffs/debuffs/controls/damage)]

Melt Armor doing 480% -res vs a single target is probably a bad idea.

[Sins of the Devs are visited upon the players]

42 minutes ago, MoonSheep said:

 

you have a great point and have certainly shown others how to contribute to such threads. i was caught up in the tit for tat arguing on the AE megathread until i saw your detailed, numerical testing AE posts

 

it certainly helped me think of how best to argue the benefits of a particular position - e.g. the small test i did to show how even rare IO sets can be earned in a matter of minutes as the basis for my call for higher prices or lower availability

 

it can be easy to get caught up in the emotions on the forum - posters have the appearance of NPCs and we all have strong feelings about the game

Glad you found it helpful. And doubly glad it encouraged you to test it for yourself!

 

 

7 minutes ago, ForeverLaxx said:

And yet, it's only posted in response to negative feedback. I don't actually care if all "untested" feedback is ignored because it doesn't follow some form letter layout. My point was that the only time you ever see "go test it" is when someone says they don't like it. Maybe the dev team doesn't care about optics, but if that were true, why have Feedback threads at all?

 

I'll continue to express my negative feedback for changes I don't like. I can run the numbers, compare the data I have to the Live server, experience a discrepancy that I already knew was there based on said data, and post my objections. Sometimes I'll object to the reasoning for a change because of how the rest of the game works (Rune of Protection's unneeded nerf, for example, or Toggle Suppression's original 8 second lockout). I'm not going to write up a dissertation for it when the process I used can be easily extrapolated based upon the feedback I'm providing. I rarely provide positive feedback because there's no point in doing so regarding changes already on the table. Those changes are happening if everyone loves it and there's nothing to talk about beyond bug fixes. The problem I have is that negative feedback has so many levers used to dismiss it that it feels similarly pointless. I don't particularly care how many times I'm told "they read everything" when reading it isn't the problem I have with what's done with it.

 

I'm not naive enough, young enough, selfish enough, or stupid enough to think that something should be changed just because I personally don't like it. But I'm also not blind enough to ignore what's so painfully obvious regarding Feedback and the favoritism surrounding certain posters with regards to it. Just like with the Live Dev Team, if it was posted to the Test Server as a major update, it was going to happen. Maybe stop calling them "Feedback" threads so I can stop pretending I have a voice I guess. You could not pay me to get into a Discord server, either. I have zero interest in yet another "Discord community" spamming me for attention.

Fair enough. You do you.

 

I do think you're confusing correlation for cause, though. If you line up all the positive feedback and all the negative feedback side-by-side, a higher percentage of the negative feedback is going to contain disruptive/offensive elements. (Due to the nature of complaining vs complimenting.) Because of this, the end result is that a higher percentage of negative comments will get purged vs positive ones.

[Sins of the Devs are visited upon the players]

50 minutes ago, ForeverLaxx said:

"Without testing" according to who? Not agreeing with the direction of certain actions doesn't mean they weren't tested beforehand. It's the summary dismissal of negative feedback under the basis of "they must not have tested it, otherwise they'd love this change" that I also take umbrage with regarding "feedback" threads. Do you make people expressing their love for a change to test them to be positive that they love it, or is this sentiment only reserved for the naysayers? I'm not going to put "and by the way, my testing agrees with me" at the end of every post.

"Not tested" has nothing to do with whether a player does/does not like a change. It simply means that their feedback is indistinguishable from someone who has just read the patch notes and passed comment.

 

All feedback is read. But the feedback that has a better chance of making an impact usually follows this format:

 

[Explanation of testing methods + results]

[Comments on the results]

 

The feedback can be positive or negative, as long as it follows the focused feedback guidelines.

 

50 minutes ago, ForeverLaxx said:

Exactly in line with my point in a previous post. Once it hits Open Beta, it's basically a done deal. Outside of rushed changes or those with huge amounts of negative feedback in general (and even then, it usually only results in a reduction in severity rather than removal), what's the point of the Feedback threads if it's essentially "set in stone?"

 

I love this game and I'm thankful for the dev team putting in their own time and resources to keep it running so I can continue to enjoy it, but I don't much enjoy the illusion of input.

The point of open beta/focused feedback threads is mostly bug/stability testing as well as feedback from the wider(more casual) playerbase. As both you and I have said, stuff does get rolled back there. Just not as frequently as closed beta. Hence me saying players who want to test changes before they become too set in stone should join closed beta.

 

If you don't want to, that's fine. But that's a choice you're making.

 

3 minutes ago, Excraft said:

But they do have an impact.  The chosen few are driving the direction of the development staff here to the detriment of everyone else who may play differently.  See your own comments -

 

Honest question, how many of the posts you've made that got deleted were critical of changes being made?  I already have a good idea what the answer is.

 

If they don't want to hear criticism of their changes, then don't ask for feedback.  Just let the inner circle do the play testing and be done with it.  The community at large isn't brought into the discussion about potential changes, they can only discuss it when changes are put onto the forums for feedback.  

You are trying to paint a 2022 Team Red vs Team Blue scenario here. (Where one side is the devs and everyone in closed beta, and the other side is everyone else.) That's just...not how it works. We're all on the same side. I argue with the dev team constantly on the closed beta discord. I'm extremely critical of changes I don't think are good. That's weird behavior for a cheerleader, right?

 

The only thing that separates me and you is that I know how to give feedback (yes, including negative feedback) in a way that will be received well. If you're not prepared to do the same, then the issue is with you.

 

See my anecdote about Powerhouse, above. I used to behave like you. It got me nowhere. I changed my approach and the dev team are now listening.

 

There is nothing stopping you from doing the same.

[GPU goes to 100% when playing CoH]

@Sinestrus

 

Try typing the following into the ingame chat and pressing enter:

 

/maxfps 60

[Sins of the Devs are visited upon the players]

On 9/10/2022 at 1:47 AM, Saikochoro said:

100% agree. Early on I joined in with the nothing being done is bad crowd. I then felt what some of the others felt in being shouted down for having unfavorable opinions. I then observed that there is a double standard applied especially in beta testing. Those that agree with all the devs decisions often get a pass even when being antagonistic. Those that disagree with the devs are moderated.
 

It’s really not the actual changes that have caused me to scale back my interest in the game. It is the double standard that is applied and the backlash from part of the community and the devs themselves when people express discontent. 
 

That and the fun police mentality.

 

To each their own though. I’m genuinely happy for the people that still very much enjoy the game and the direction it has taken. 

Sorry to hear you're going off the game. I remember your feedback in the Rune of Protection thread being especially thoughtful & thorough.

For what it's worth, I've had suggestions of mine added to the game as well as changes rolled back after providing feedback...but I've also seen stuff added to the game that I disagreed with, and have had posts of mine deleted from feedback threads. It's just the nature of internet forums. Pays to try and not be too sensitive about it. Consider that 90% of focused feedback thread posts are:

• Players arguing with each other without testing anything.
• Players asking the devs to explain the reason for the changes, again without testing anything.
• Players giving feedback...on the patch notes.
• Dev haters and Dev fanboys Ben Shapiroing each other whilst giving the vaguest of nods to the topic of the thread.

I imagine it's wearying for the dev team to have to sift through all that noise to find feedback based on actually testing the changes. This is why your Rune feedback stood out, to the point where I can recall it one year on. That's how rare actual playtested feedback is.

 

And yes the dev fanboys + funpolice can be irritating. Early on in Page 4's development, I pointed out that removing vet XP from the AE would likely lead to a lot of PvPers (including myself) quitting the game, as we would now have to unlock our incarnates for our PvP characters by doing regular PvE content, rather than getting them quickly via farming. I was swamped by dev fanboys/funpolice who told me to deal with it. (I believe "earn it like everyone else" was said at one point.) The devs responded, we discussed it amidst all these fanboys telling me I was Playing Wrong, and the devs ultimately agreed with me. The result was the Temporal Warriors and free incarnates for PvP.

 

So, yeah, don't worry about the fanboys. They have no impact on anything. "The devs can do no wrong" is just as useless, and just as ignored, as "everything the devs do is wrong" when it comes to feedback.

 

In my experience the dev team do listen to feedback from players willing to compromise and discuss ideas. Case in point: a few years back I was rude to Powerhouse. I can't remember the specifics, but I think he added something to PvP that I disagreed with and my reaction was to critique him/his game knowledge, rather than critique the change. As a consequence, we pretty much didn't talk for a year. I regret doing it, and had a word with myself to not be such an asshole in future, and to try and compromise rather than demand everything fit the One True Way I believe the game should be. Cut to now: Powerhouse has no problem talking about balance stuff with me. He's even pinged me a few times about PvP-related balance tweaks. Nothing changed other than how I behaved.

 

So, moral of the story is that I changed how I behaved, treated others with respect, was willing to compromise, and stopped acting like such a bloody know it all, and as a consequence the devs started listening. I'd urge others in this thread to do the same. (Not you, you're fine Saikochoro. More of a general comment.)

 

One other thing worth mentioning is the Closed Beta discord/forums. They're worth joining. They allow players to test new changes and provide feedback on them before they become too set in stone. (Which is often, but not always, the case in Open Beta.)

[Sins of the Devs are visited upon the players]

13 minutes ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

That's fine, except then you lose the people changing one into the other because why in the world do they need another billion inf?

Having a high turnover of people playing converter roulette is good for the economy. Means it remains a viable means for new players looking to make their first billion.

 

It keeps prices low, and helps new players make money. Win/win!