gabrilend

What kind of different pet? Would it look the same, just have a higher strength fear to use against enemies?

Mass Levitate could use a similar graphic as the AoE shield bubble that forcefield support characters get. Ideally with an recolored effect. Call it a "selective anti-gravity field generator" or something like that I see you have slash and parry, but also quick strike - quick strike is a punch, right? While slash and parry use weapons. Would this powerset have a costume weapon included? If so, which kind? I'm also a fan of the tazer origin power that characters start with, that could be an option for a short-range ranged attack. Could fit with the melee theme if you make it short enough range, maybe recolor it to be yellow/blue by default instead of white?

I see. Well, perhaps their damage could be increased as well. Perhaps a reduction in their "base" damage, but an increase to the amount of damage gained from fury? Thus concentrating their damage potential in their unique mechanic. And if the reduction in base damage was, say, -15%, the bonus from fury could be proportionally larger, say, 30%, to provide an overall buff to their damage potential when in their element. I do believe such changes are possible with the introduction of the proposed mechanics. I remember reading in the linked thread that there was a general feeling of dissatisfaction with the "Build Up" power, with many voices feeling that it was too similar to Scrappers and that it only affected their damage potential (which is not ideal for a hybrid class) - perhaps an alteration could be made to that power, in addition to the suggestions I made in the original post. How about this: In addition to the proposed changes, alter Build Up such that it is now a defensive toggle. When enabled, your abilities no longer cost endurance, but rather draw from your health bar. Essentially allowing the brute to fight through the exhaustion at the expense of their physical health. Not only would this give them the capacity to fight for longer than Scrappers, but it would also allow for their team to keep them going for as long as they can throw heals at them. In addition, it would provide a much-needed counter to endurance draining sets in PvP, which is a nice bonus. Perhaps throw in a damage buff or something as well, just to sweeten the deal and encourage them to use that power even when they aren't completely out of endurance. To make it even more interesting, perhaps when the Brute is in their 0-10% hp state, this Build Up replacement toggle power would periodically convert some of their endurance into health, thus giving them a way to ensure that they could survive a fight (should they have the resources necessary to actually overcome their foes). This would, in essence, give Brutes three health bars, which is kind of absurd, but, like, Brutes are wild, so maybe not such a bad thing. I think this would not only buff the damage output of Brutes, which seems to be the primary concern, but it would also interact in an interesting way to the additional proposed mechanics of their fury bar acting as a second health bar. Perhaps the Brute wouldn't feel so concerned about spending time in the lower regions of their health bar if they knew that they had a second chance should they dip below 0%. And to be clear, this new idea wouldn't give the Brutes more resources to use, but rather it would enable them to convert the resources into whatever they needed in the moment. I think this added flexibility would give the Brute a new identity that, apparently, they are sorely lacking.

RIP street sweeping, may you live again one day, perhaps due to the proposed system, perhaps in some other way. Alas, your reign was glorious, short as it may be, as the City of Heroes was safer in your presence. That sounds fun. Though I wonder if there'd be any reason to continue doing it after you got that accolade.

Hi, I just saw your edit. You're correct in saying Boromir fought with discipline, however I'd argue that he's still a brute. What is fury but a state of focused concentration and intention? In Boromir's final moments, his purpose was singular - he gave his life to protect the hobbits upon which the fate of the world rested. A fate which was suddenly precarious due to his very actions taken just a few moments prior, with Frodo. When defending Merry and Pippin, I believe his quality of character shone through the mistake he had just made due to the inherent weakness in the hearts of men, and his honor carried him forth to his final sleep on the river Anduin. (I say sleep because when he appeared to his brother in a dream wearing the golden belt of Lorien, he was described as if he was asleep) When I think of Brutes, I think of fighters who engage in that kind of flow state. Sure, many of them are angry, but you don't have to be mad to be furious. Take for example the Furyans in Chronicles of Riddick (the name gives it away hehe) -> they can enter a sort of "berserker rage" that gives them enhanced combat prowess, however it's more of a state of focused determination rather than explicit anger. I think they'd be brutes because of the build-up of concentration, and that, I think, is what defines fury, rather than a sense of rage or hatred. Consider, if you will, a furious maelstrom. Does the wind harbor hatred in it's heart? Does it act in pursuit of spiting those who it buffets? I think the wind is exultant, that is is a cacophonous burst of chaotic energy borne from the flapping of a butterfly's wings in Tokyo. So too do I believe that Brutes are exultant in their fury, and while that may manifest as anger for the majority of players, I don't believe that it is necessary or inherent to the concept of "fury".

Unfortunately this isn't a solution to the ideas as presented. I'll explain why in my response to Luminara's post. That should currently be possible with leagues. The minimum distance requirement (100 yards) to receive rewards is still there, but that's a sizeable area in which to pack characters, and there are a lot of places in the game where spawn locations are dense enough to permit everyone to fight without overlapping. The rewards are also better than what you've proposed (inf*, drops, higher XP). I don't believe Leagues are the solution. They provide a significant amount of friction that is one of the many reasons why people don't form street sweeping teams today, and in addition the EXP they distribute is not limited to the neighborhood, which is important because not only is a neighborhood much larger than 100 yards, meaning players could spread out significantly more, but also they are not automatic. Someone needs to take care of recruiting and organizing the team/league, and that's too much to ask for something that should be a natural state for player characters to find themselves in. Thematically, I mean. Say you're a hero named Shumkunkle wandering Paragon looking for trouble. You see another hero fighting, so you drop in and help them. You both learn from the experience, and you go your separate ways. With leagues being the solution to this problem, you'd have to invite them to a team or receive diminished rewards. And besides, if you're on one end of the neighborhood fighting Skulls and there's another hero on the other end doing the same, with leagues there's a significant chance that you would have no idea the other was there. Meaning you're less likely to team up, which is precisely the purpose of this suggestion. Thematically, doesn't it make sense for heroes to move on once they've "cleared" an area of foes? And thematically, doesn't it make sense that Shumkunkle and that other hero on the other side of the neighborhood would both be working toward the same goal of "clearing" the area of baddies? I think by sharing the experience they gain, thematically it could be said that they're both contributing toward their common goal - making the city safer for the people who live in it. And as such, once the area is sufficiently "safe" -> as in, the player has outleveled the area, then they should move on to the next place. With leagues, it creates an *explicit* contract between heroes / villains to fight alongside one another. With the EXP distribution per neighborhood idea, the contract is *implicit* and automatic. That reintroduces the problem of players who aren't participating in the activity having greater difficulty traversing the location. Larger spawns in their path between points A and B, spawns appropriate for hazard zones, popping in unexpectedly, not giving players time to maneuver around them. 2004 Hollows. The death run to the Icon in Steel Canyon. Debt Express. Not fun times. I never said the spawns should be larger. In fact I think they should be the same size, to facilitate spreading out and dispersing through the neighborhood without fear of dying. And if popping in unexpectedly is a concern, which I do believe it is, then make the minimum distance to spawn units be the same as the aggro distance. Or even reduce the aggro distance if there are a significant amount of players in the neighborhood. I actually liked 2004 Hollows, though I didn't start playing until 2006 if I remember correctly. Then there's no point to those missions. If all a player has to do is wait for passersby to do the work, there's no reason for the missions to exist at all. Those "Defeat X Carnies" missions have a purpose, are in the game to give players something to do. Those "Defeat X Council" missions in the middle of story arcs or TFs are there as part of the story. Change the system so anyone defeating those enemies counts for the mission or story arc or TF, and they're no longer relevant, and while some of them might be excessive (Numina, again), it would better to redesign the content than to implement a change which turns them into "go to Zone X, stand in Y for 10 seconds" missions. It would also be horrendously confusing for players who didn't understand that the reason one street sweep mission automatically completed was because someone else was street sweeping in the same neighborhood, but another mission is just sitting there, the counter not moving, because no-one else is out there. Yes, that's true, which is why I originally didn't suggest that. I personally think the current behavior for those missions is fine, but you seemed to have an issue with that so I offered a solution. It seems to me that you're correct in saying that this solution is not a good one, so I don't believe any changes should be necessary. To be clear: currently, if you have an open-world kill quest and you see someone else kill that type of monster, then you don't get credit. I believe this behavior should be unaltered. Your original concern was this: I believe that this issue would not end up being that big of a deal. Not only would you automatically be put into a group who could help you fight those mobs if you're solo, but also if the zone is "full enough to be troublesome" then the spawn rates would be increased to compensate. I think this would be an issue, but a relatively minor one, especially considering how rare those missions are. No. If you're not actively engaged with a nearby enemy, not teamed with someone who is, or not in a league with someone who is, the only thing you get is a notification in the chat window. No kill credit, no XP, no inf*, no drops, no badges, nothing. That's one of the fundamental design principles of this game. All rewards are dependent on participation, and simply being in the general area when other players are active isn't participation. That makes sense to me. However I would like to point out that farm sitters are a pretty explicit example of the kind of behavior you're arguing against here, and to be even more generic all you have to do is be on a team while someone else fights baddies around you and you'll get rewarded without participating. I see. Well, the proposed system only suggests an alteration to EXP distribution. As far as I can tell, the economy should remain relatively unaffected. Also, 5 million infamy for an hour playing is a massive amount of dosh, though I guess my perspective is a little warped because I've never gotten a character to 50 teehee You can set up macros (computer macros, not game macros) with any halfway decent keyboard or mouse software, and even low-end input devices come with that kind of software these days. It's bundled with the drivers. And for those with bottom shelf crap that's just doing basic input, there's freeware that does this. And the game can't distinguish between a person pressing a key/button and a computer sending keyboard/mouse input to the game via macros. It's impossible to create any anti-AFK measure that a simple macro program can't defeat because it's impossible for the game to distinguish between macro input and manual input. The type of AFK detection I'm advocating for is pretty simple, basically if a player hasn't defeated a monster in the past minute then they don't get distributed EXP rewards. That's pretty much it. I'll explain how I'd implement the architecture: Whenever a player enters a zone, they get added to a list. When they leave, they are removed from that list. This list iterates through all the players in the zone one step per second (or other interval as determined by the capabilities of the server and the number of players in the zone). It checks the timestamp for when the player last defeated an enemy, and if it's greater than 1 minute then a boolean is flipped on their character's record in the list. This boolean is used to determine which heroes to distribute EXP rewards to. Next time they defeat a foe, the boolean flips back (or perhaps the next time the list iteration rolls past them). I believe this is a simple enough solution that should handle most AFK issues. Combined with the limitation that mobs cannot spawn at a certain spawn point while a player or their minions are within the aggro radius (both of the mob and the "aggressive" pet aggro distance) I think that AFKers should be mostly defeated. What do you think? Am I missing any situations that might apply? And just to clarify, this limitation only applies to the NEW source of exp distribution. The default means of acquiring EXP, perhaps from your friends fighting things nearby for you, should still be in effect. Albeit at a reduced rate, as 50% of their EXP is being distributed to the neighborhood... Thanks for explaining the zone capped mechanics. I've seen that before so I'm familiar, I just didn't recognize that name for it. I never said they should be hazard zone sized spawns, but I already clarified that earlier in this comment. If this player is the only one in the neighborhood, then perhaps the EXP would be reduced compared the current implementation of street sweeping. But like you go on to say later, NO-ONE is street sweeping, so perhaps that's not such a bad thing, especially considering that this idea would provide structure for street-sweeping groups to actually organize through. I believe we can implement the kinds of rewards that would motivate players to engage with this kind of content, see for example this idea that I had when talking with @McSpazz: I think this is absolutely a wonderful idea. Having an increased threat monster arise due to the presence of heroes, or maybe an archvillain shows up to stomp on all the lesser villains, something to that effect. Perhaps there's a hidden counter or meter that fills up as players fight monsters in the zone, and when a certain amount have been defeated a hero/archvillain is spawned that is thematically appropriate for that level range. That's a decent reward, but I believe it's a little similar to the Giant Monster mechanic. Perhaps an additional twist is necessary...! What if this archvillain/hero that spawns is of the opposite alignment to the zone. So, for example, if you're in Paragon City, an archvillain would spawn who was hostile to the players *and* the normal enemies present. So a neighborhood in Atlas Park for example which is mostly populated by Hellions would have an archvillain spawn who was drawn to the fighting for some reason and wanders around much like a player does fighting both heroes and Hellions. I believe that would encourage players to fight them, because not only would they be worth a lot of exp and infamy/influence, they also would be reducing the potential targets for their street sweeping patrol. There's currently already a large group of NPC costumes created for the bank heist missions. Perhaps after (100 * number of players in zone) enemy units are slain / arrested / beaten down, it spawns a hero/archvillain in a random neighborhood? Ideally, without any proclamation or explanation of their presence. That way players would have to hunt them down. Basically mirroring the players and using the same behavior they're using, but for the opposite side. Perhaps when defeating these archvillains/heroes, you're given a reward merit? Would that be sufficient reward / motivation to engage with this kind of content, for the reward-oriented players in our midst? So, if "restricting the distribution system enough to ensure it was balanced would leave it below all other activities", and "no-one is forming these types of teams because of a lack of incentive", then... why not give reward merits for street sweeping? You say they can't, but... why not? Specifically, if a reward merit was given for defeating the archvillains / heroes that pop up. Not giant monster level threats, just one step above boss minions. Would that be an adequate reward? You go on to express some ideas for more unique rewards, but... I don't really like that kind of idea. It feels too separate from the activity itself, like offering cosmetic rewards for achievements or something. Ideally, this type of content would have the same type of rewards as other types of content, allowing it to be an alternative to running the same missions and tasks forces and such over and over and over again... And that brings me to the primary motivation behind implementing gameplay mechanics that encourage street sweeping. There's a massive amount of environments in the game that are just... inert, because there's no reason to engage with them. People say that it's difficult to add new powersets because developing assets is hard and that it's hard to create new costume pieces because making 3d models is hard, and when I hear that I can't help but think of the content that already exists in the game that could be utilized for a massive bump in content for players to engage with. All that it would need is some mechanical systems that organize players to engage with the open world. I believe that street sweeping (should it be adequately compensated and correctly designed to bring players together) is fundamentally a more engaging experience than running missions all day. Wouldn't you rather be out under the open sky than in a cramped warehouse or office building? Especially one that you've seen a hundred times... Wouldn't you rather there were no walls to bind you, save for the ethereal blue ones that appear when you stray too far from land? (engine limitations hehe) - I personally enjoy the feeling of deciding where I'd like to go in the moment. It's never the same place because there's always new places to go. And if you run out of places, then odds are you're about to level out of the area anyway. And if I were to join a street sweeping team like you suggest (I've organized them before) then not only would I be compelled to concentrate on the place where the rest of my team is located due to EXP not being distributed farther than a short distance, but also we'd easily clear the area of any white/yellow enemies, meaning we're compelled to move to areas with orange, red, and purple enemies. This solution does not create the type of behavior and playstyle that I believe the proposed idea would, specifically the ability to disperse throughout a neighborhood (as the EXP would be distributed to your allies) and to fight equal level enemies (because you never know when your friends are going to leave the area/team, meaning you're likely to be stranded in a difficult zone if you punch above your weight class) I believe that implementing this idea using a few new mechanical systems without any additional art assets would allow Homecoming to set itself apart from the other servers even more than it currently is, for minimal effort.

I didn't realize that. That's a shame.

1. Can you clarify what you mean by "meaningful capacity"? Are you looking for a mechanical change that alters the identity of the class itself? I believe that will be difficult to implement, because players have a lot invested in their characters and their nature. 2. I'm sorry, like I said I don't play Brutes. I was mostly pulling that idea from the thread I linked to. Can you tell me more about what your idea for the identity of the Brute is? Perhaps I can come up with an idea that appeals to your ideal while also fitting into the design advocated by others. I see your point. While the health gains from Willpower regeneration and Fiery Aura's Healing Flames should roughly equal out over time, the spiked healing of Healing Flames allows the Fire Aura brute to regenerate fury while the health regeneration of the Willpower brute does not. This would lead to an imbalance in favor of Fiery Aura. I'm not sure how to fix that. I'm not sure if this would work for every powerset that has an issue like this, but maybe when at 0hp Willpower's regeneration increases your fury bar instead of your health? And once you're at 100% fury, it starts healing you again. That fits thematically with the idea that Willpower Brutes can push themselves even further than other kinds of brutes, while keeping their survivability and damage output roughly equivalent to other characters. I'm not sure if the numbers would work out, but it's worth considering I think. So you're saying Blasters should get a buff to their melee damage - on this we agree 😉

@Luminara You raise some good points, and I'd like to address them one-by-one because I believe the issues you raise may be ameliorated with some strategic design decisions. I think this would be construed as a direct assault on farming unless the restriction were specific to open-world content. And if it was set up that way, it wouldn't act as encouragement to participate in open-world content, as it offers nothing to make it more desirable than, or even equally desirable to, TFs, Trials, raids, scanner/newspaper missions, tips, or even plain old story arcs. It isn't even comparably rewarding for people who just want to street sweep, since they can street sweep now and gain inf* in addition to XP. The intention is neither to assault farming nor to make street sweeping more desirable to (or even equally desirable to) TFs, trials, raids, radio/newspaper missions, tips, or contact missions. The purpose is to breathe life into a form of content that is functionally inert, but has quite a bit of development time spent on it by the original developers. Essentially adding a new way to play the game that already exists, without altering the *optimal* way to play. The goal, I believe, is to appeal to people who are more motivated by the "fun" or the "fantasy" of the game, without altering the playstyles of people who are interested in more optimal, profitable, or beneficial gameplay styles. In addition, I believe it would encourage people to spend time outside Atlas Park, as they'd be able to actively play the game in a social way without having to spend effort organizing a team. You're absolutely right, those numbers are absurd. I believe that the EXP should be *shared* equally amongst all players present in a neighborhood, not duplicated. So, as an example, let's take your 100 level 25 characters in Talos example. Everyone defeats one minion which gives 96 exp, and since there's 100 players in one neighborhood (where are they all going to stand, by the way? 100 is a massive amount of players, I've never seen more than like, 20 in an entire zone, much less a neighborhood) since there's 100 players receiving EXP, they each would get about 0.96 exp, as the 96 exp from the mob is distributed equally. If that doesn't feel rewarding to the player doing the fighting, then perhaps the EXP gained is split in two, with one portion given to the player doing the fighting and the other half being given to the rest of the neighborhood. This would encourage players to fight (as they'd get the largest portion of damage dealt) while also spreading the benefit to everyone else as well. However, this disadvantages support characters, but I believe the auto-team mechanic should fix that - support characters would be encouraged to hang out with the players in their team, and as such any EXP their teammates gain while nearby would be distributed to them as well. I drew a graphic to illustrate, see attached picture: They're not difficult to complete now. If players start taking over neighborhoods, and remember that enemies can't respawn until there's no-one near the spawn point (the only spawns that can are in the starter zones, like the Hellion Lieutenants around the lake in AP), there's nothing left for others unless all of the street sweepers pack up and leave. Yes, that the same code used in the starter zones can be applied universally. That would resolve that problem, but introduce the problem of players just parking in an optimal spawn point and putting an AoE/PBAoE on auto. And it would be even faster, since they wouldn't be wasting part of that 15 seconds moving on to another spawn to hit the 4 minions per minute quota. 10 minions served up every 60 seconds, courtesy of the server. Since they're being fed their minions, there'd be no incentive for players to roll on, so players trying to complete street sweeps for missions would find it even more difficult to locate un-owned spawns. I don't believe it would be a good idea to apply the starter zone spawning mechanics to everywhere. In fact I don't even like it in the starting zones, it makes the world feel less "real" However, those design decisions were implemented in order to counteract a specific undesired effect - namely, the early zones would be too crowded and there wouldn't be anyone to fight. Therefore, a possible solution might be to reduce the distance needed between a player and a spawn-point that is attempting to spawn units depending on how many players are in the neighborhood (or zone, if that's easier to implement). This would allow for a scaling increase to the spawn rate as the number of players present increased. I believe that would address this particular concern without allowing for players to simply park their Mastermind on-top of a spawn point and make a sandwich / walk the dog. In fact, now that I think of it, I believe this would be a necessary change in order to implement the proposed idea. Otherwise, when players fan out they'd stifle the spawning of enemies in the zone such that there'd be nobody to fight. That is undesired behavior, however the alteration to the spawning rates I suggested should compensate for that issue I believe. I see your point. Maybe the credit for those specific rare unit types could be shared amongst others who aren't on your team? I kinda figured that's how it functioned already, honestly. I think there are solutions to this issue. If it appears to be impossible to implement without being abused, I don't think it should be implemented. However, I think there are ways to curtail abuse without stifling the enjoyment of players who want to engage with the game in this way. First it should be ensured that players cannot AFK while mobs throw themselves at them. In addition AFK players should not receive distributed EXP - they should still get EXP from teammates that are fighting nearby, as they currently do, however they shouldn't be able to contribute nothing and still learn from the experience. You can't get stronger without doing pushups, after all. Can you explain this part a bit more? What do you mean by "zone capped", do you mean "at the high end of the level range for the zone"? And what do you mean about not earning any infamy/influence? The EXP may be distributed amongst players in the neighborhood, but the infamy gain is kept as-is. You should not be able to claim credit for something you didn't directly contribute to. Also, I'm not sure about the drops. I don't engage with that side of the game very much so I'm open to suggestions about how to address the concerns you have. Can you clarify your concerns about drops so that someone else might be able to think of a solution? Thank you for writing such a long post. I appreciate the conversation 🥰

that makes sense to me, thanks for clarifying the math. Sometimes that kind of thing is difficult for me. I think the effects you describe are within the intent of the design as suggested. The reason I say that is because the intent with this proposed change is to increase their survivability against spikes of damage, as they can just "shrug it off" and keep fighting through the pain, while Tankers would be able to handle sustained damage much easier because they are tough and built to take the wounds of the team upon themselves. I believe this would highlight the differences between the Brute and the Tanker by giving them different methods of tanking damage. Thus, they would be differentiated from Scrappers on the damage front (critical strike versus fury bar) and from the Tanker on the survivability front (greater overall defences versus larger risky health bar) without infringing on either of their design space.

Can't help but think that the SG base designer is how Architect Entertainment should have been implemented... If this suggestion is implemented, we could create bases that could act as forms of PvE content created for people to engage with. I think that would be awesome.

I would absolutely be in favor of this being an option for players to toggle in their UI settings. There's plenty of powers that do this, including but not limited to ice shields, and keeping the fantasy of my character while still being able to receive the buffs of my allies would be quite nice.

Their HP may be reduced by 25%, but the fury bar health effect would more than compensate. My vision is that 1% of health would equal 1% of fury, meaning it would essentially double their health bar and then reduce it by 50%, meaning Brutes get an overall increase of 50% to their survivability. Assuming my math there is correct, sometimes percentages trip me up... But percentages can be adjusted when balancing. The intention is to bring their unique mechanic (fury) into a position where it benefits both their survivability *and* their damage output, which should help them feel more aligned mechanically to their identity as a "middle-ground" between scrappers and tankers, while also enhancing their flavor as powerful thugs who fight based on their rage rather than their prowess (scrappers) or their power (tankers) Would increasing their damage solve the problem? My understanding was that they typically deal more damage than scrappers (not ideal) unless in a team with a kinetics support player who can cast Fulcrum Shift on them, which brings them up to the damage cap alongside the scrappers on their team. This has the effect that scrappers can suddenly deal significantly more damage than the Brute, but only on a team with buffs that bring the brute to their damage cap. Your suggestion is to increase the damage cap, correct? If so, then wouldn't they be unbalanced when NOT in a team that can buff them to the damage cap? A Brute with extra damage would be on par with a scrapper, at least according to the people in the thread I linked to. I do believe that is undesired behavior mechanically. Their overall survivability would increase by approximately 50%, unless my percentages are wrong. Their "second health bar" is already present as a damage buff that increases over time as they deal damage, my suggestion is to allow them to utilize it as an extra health bar when their primary one is depleted. In addition, I'm suggesting that their primary health bar continue to recover while between 0 and 5-10% hp, but their fury bar doesn't increase. Meaning they can't keep fighting forever, their body has limits, they need to rest / be healed before it's too late or else they'll perish. Rage doesn't keep the heart beating or the blood flowing through veins, though it may lend strength to the muscles. I want to clarify, damage taken wouldn't reduce fury unless the brute is between 0 and 5-10% hp. In addition, I don't want it to *only* impact survivability, I want it to have a dual role of being a damage buff as it currently is, and also acting as health reserves should the Brute start to die. If you've played D&D, I'm essentially suggesting that Brutes could continue fighting while they're making death saves. What other "possible interactions" did you have in mind? In addition, you say that they shouldn't compete with tankers, and yet that's originally what they were designed to do - when CoV launched they were the only tanks redside. So they were explicitely intended to compete with tankers, or rather to be the redside version of them. I don't understand that particular concern, can you clarify? Yes, that's intended behavior. If the player character is hurt enough that they *should* be dead, it makes sense that they'd start losing power as their strength fails them.

Hi, I have a mechanical idea that I think might address the concerns presented in the first 5 pages of this thread. I don't play Brutes often, so take this with a grain of salt. However it has been expressed that their desired role is that of a middle ground between Tankers and Scrappers. This is reflected in their class's distinguishing feature, their Fury mechanic, however it is primarily a damaged focused power, meaning their flavor leans toward favoring the Scrapper side of the AT spectrum. One could argue that their bonuses to threat brings them closer to Tankers, and while true I believe that there should be some alteration to the Fury mechanic to do that, rather than threat. Here's my proposal. Leave everything about the Brute the same, threat, damage cap, fury granting damage, everything. Next, reduce their health by 25%. Then, alter the Fury mechanic such that when a Brute reaches 0 hp, they do not die, but instead damage taken is taken from their fury bar. If the brute reaches 0 fury, they've lost the will to fight, and as such fall unconscious / die (depending on your perception of the fantasy of the game). In addition, while in a 0hp state they cannot generate new fury, as their body is too weak to build up more rage. If they manage to defeat their foes, their fury will continue ticking down and if their natural regeneration is enough to bring them up above, say, 5 or 10% hp before they run out of fury, then they'll live to fight another day. However if they cannot regenerate enough hp (or be healed by a teammate) then they will fall unconscious/die from their wounds, having slain countless foes that litter the ground around them, evoking Boromir or Broxigar. I believe this will grant a new flavor to the Fury mechanic which will set aside Brutes as straddling the middleground between Scrappers and Tankers, allowing them to fight back beyond the brink of death fueled by pure rage, while also dealing more damage the madder they get.

lol thanks I guess? xD Yes I don't think that this would work very well. I think that disconnecting mobs from their level is against the ethos of an MMO with a living breathing world. It makes the world feel less alive, if there's no difference where you are. The level scaling in modern versions of WoW do something similar to this, and I don't really like it. Really kills the sense of progression as you level. Just to clarify, I don't think that EXP should be shared with the entire zone, just the entire neighborhood. When you're looking at a map, there are a few pale blue dots that correspond to the green/yellow/orange/red areas on the map. Each of those would count as a "neighborhood" for the purposes of this idea. I agree, but unfortunately people don't often join teams for it. And when they do, it's localized to a particular area, and they feel frustrated when they run out of enemies to fight. So they seek tougher challenges with their larger teams, rather than dispersing and fighting similarly leveled foes, as the game is balanced around as far as hard character stats like health and accuracy and such go. Increasing the AoE of EXP dispersal would help and could be a decent alternative to my idea, but I think my idea is better both thematically and mechanically. The primary downside is the development cost and potential for lack of player interest.

What a lovely challenge! I'd love to hear more about that. I usually play that way, but when I get lonely I sometimes do newspaper missions or team up with other party members. It fills me with a sense of longing for a more populated city/island. I think this is absolutely a wonderful idea. Having an increased threat monster arise due to the presence of heroes, or maybe an archvillain shows up to stomp on all the lesser villains, something to that effect. Perhaps there's a hidden counter or meter that fills up as players fight monsters in the zone, and when a certain amount have been defeated a hero/archvillain is spawned that is thematically appropriate for that level range. That's a decent reward, but I believe it's a little similar to the Giant Monster mechanic. Perhaps an additional twist is necessary...! What if this archvillain/hero that spawns is of the opposite alignment to the zone. So, for example, if you're in Paragon City, an archvillain would spawn who was hostile to the players *and* the normal enemies present. So a neighborhood in Atlas Park for example which is mostly populated by Hellions would have an archvillain spawn who was drawn to the fighting for some reason and wanders around much like a player does fighting both heroes and Hellions. I believe that would encourage players to fight them, because not only would they be worth a lot of exp and infamy/influence, they also would be reducing the potential targets for their street sweeping patrol. There's currently already a large group of NPC costumes created for the bank heist missions. Perhaps after (100 * number of players in zone) enemy units are slain / arrested / beaten down, it spawns a hero/archvillain in a random neighborhood? Ideally, without any proclamation or explanation of their presence. That way players would have to hunt them down. Basically mirroring the players and using the same behavior they're using, but for the opposite side. It seems to me that the kind of mechanic you're suggesting is already in the game. We have Rikti invasions and Nemesis plots and various other events that occur at randomized intervals which draw players to certain zones. I believe those mechanics are useful and interesting, but they do not accomplish the same goals I have when presenting this idea. Namely, they work to *concentrate* players in particular zones, while my idea is intended to *disperse* players throughout whichever zone they're most suitable for level-wise. The idea is that you'll be playing as you normally do, sweeping the streets, and you'll occasionally be grouped up with a fellow player or three who are also doing the same thing. You'll share EXP, and be able to see their location / health bars which should allow you to coordinate easier. And if you want to move on or do something else, all you have to do is walk away and you'll be put into a different group or given space to yourself again.

While we're at it, can we decrease the minimum size of the chat box? I like having a large UI scale, but I tend to like my chat-box to be tall and skinny. However with a large UI scale the chatbox takes up 1/3rd of the screen... I usually end up disabling it entirely while playing, except for brief moments when my character checks their phone or whatever.

I do believe this is already possible. Is the capability you seek covered by the /petsay command? reference: https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/Petsay_(Slash_Command)

That makes sense from a thematic point of view (how could you learn anything from a fight you didn't engage in?) but it severely hampers the implementation of the proposed idea, as players are intended to be encouraged to spread out in the neighborhood rather than clump up within eye-sight range, as they do currently in most missions. They'd still be encouraged to fight alongside one another, because it's always easier and more fun to do so, however they would not be punished for going their own way or by being abandoned by their teammates. I believe that the benefits offered are greater than the negatives caused by this issue. Perhaps the EXP gain could be explained in canon as heroes discussing their engagements with friends after the fact, while the player is logged off? Or possibly since the area is being cleared, the new enemies that wander in to replace them are less experienced, and thus slightly easier for your character to fight (purely thematic, no mechanical buffs or debuffs applied) Benefits: increased presence in the open world, giving new environments for players to explore alternative playstyle involving protecting/hunting in a neighborhood increased teamplay due to the dynamic companionship from wandering players Negatives: potential for AFK abuse thematic issues with earning exp out of earshot reduces capability to accomplish open-world missions (of which there are but a few) Correct me if I'm wrong but one of those lists appears more valuable to me than the other. So I guess I'm saying "a little evil for a greater good" which is quite a vigilante thing to say, now that I think of it.

I had an idea, and I moved it to this thread EDIT: I'm going to post this in it's own thread, so it can get more focused discussion. Sorry for distracting from the discussion of the changes proposed by OP, carry on...

Ah yes I was concerned about that as well. Which is why I said: "I believe this will encourage players to fight in the overworld, and if AFKers are a concern then perhaps make it so that after 2 minutes of inactivity you stop gaining this type of EXP until you engage with an opponent again." Do you think that solution wouldn't adequately address the "world-sitters"? I'm open to hearing suggestions, of course. I don't think there's enough players to support that kind of issue. Over time players would spread out to whichever zone they were leveled to (as encouraged by the proposed auto-party mechanics) and I believe that would ensure enough dispersal that it wouldn't be an issue. Perhaps disable this behavior at level 50, or re-enable the malefactor/exemplar system for level 50s and bring them to the average level of each neighborhood? Also, the current open-world missions aren't too difficult to complete. If there are enemy types in a particular area, there's typically enough around for you to be able to find the kind that you'd need. Are there specific missions you had in mind that target rare mobs? I was only aware of the kind that are like "defeat 8 hellions" or "defeat 8 Crey units". But if they were more specific, like "defeat 8 embalmed Vahzilok corpses" or "defeat 8 Clockwork Tesla Knights" then perhaps that would be a bigger concern than I'm expecting. I see what you mean. Perhaps this would be an "opt-in" system, like the auto-generated groups I suggested which (as proposed) are only applied when the player marks themselves as "looking for patrol team" in the team finder interface.

City of Heroes is known for it's vibrant, beautiful, and diverse overworld. One if it's finest qualities is the verisimilitude of the city - it feels alive, like a real living breathing place. A major part of this is due to the civilians who wander around and greet you if you say hi. The mobs that your character can fight will often terrorize one of these lovely people, and that tugs at the heartstrings of any righteous hero. Of course, a villain might see the same situation and decide that these pre-occupied goons are a perfect target for assassination. Perhaps the civilian will cower in terror before them and offer up their meagre life's possessions, or perhaps whatever information they know will be a valuable tip for them in their exploits to come. In either case, there is an inherent incentive for players to contest these wandering enemies and their acts of terror. I believe that mechanics should be added which encourage players to engage with the overworld as if it was any other piece of content, for the developers certainly intended as such. Consider the amount of effort and variety given to the design of each and every environment, and if you share my perspective then you will see a labor of love. However there is little reason for players to wander around on patrol looking for trouble. Their attention is too often drawn to missions and task forces to bother with such trivialities, and indeed most players would rather hang out in Atlas Park waiting for something interesting to happen. I believe that this impulse is fundamentally due to their desire to play on a team, and Atlas Park is just the best place to be around a lot of people. Therefore, I suggest adding mechanics that both encourage engagement with the overworld but also connect players and bring them into natural, organic teams. My first suggestion is this: share all exp gained from fighting enemies to all players in the local neighborhood. I believe this will encourage players to fight in the overworld, and if AFKers are a concern then perhaps make it so that after 2 minutes of inactivity you stop gaining this type of EXP until you engage with an opponent again. This encourages overworld play, however it does not necessarily bring players together. To that end I suggest placing players who mark themselves as "looking for patrol team" in the team finder into auto-generated groups on a per-neighborhood basis. I believe this is a more difficult solution, however I think that being on a team gives players a sense of companionship, and the auto-generated nature of it allows for them to enter / leave teams easily simply by moving neighborhoods. Not only will this connect players who are at similar levels, it will also give them a way to grant each other buffs and support one another if they're in peril. Currently, patrol teams tend to group up and snowball around fighting purple or red enemy groups. This I believe is an anti-pattern because it's too closely aligned to the style of gameplay performed in mission teams, where fighting high level enemies is expected and encouraged through the increased EXP gains and our ability to customize the difficulty of missions. In the proposed system where players are placed into teams based on geographic location, it will be natural for players to spread out and explore because of the larger spaces they inhabit. In addition they will be encouraged to fight similarly leveled opponents, because if their team disbands (due to outleveling the area or perhaps from going to sleep or switching characters) then they will be left in an area that is out of sync with their player's level, and so will have to spend time walking to a train station or a boat or whatever when they're left all alone. Important to note is that the lackey/malefactor and sidekick/exemplar system must be disabled for these types of auto-generated teams. Not only would this open up new styles of gameplay for players to engage with, it will do so without necessitating the development of new art assets. All that would be needed would be programmatic alterations, and while my understanding is that CoX has a legacy codebase full of spaghetti, code is often much easier to develop than art for this kind of team. To summarize: 1. sharing exp (but not infamy/influence) to all players in a particular neighborhood will encourage players to engage with the overworld content 2. placing players onto auto-generated teams based on geographic proximity and limited to their current neighborhood will help bring players together 3. engaging with content in new ways (by encouraging fighting similarly leveled opponents and spreading out to find more foes) gives players more options for how to play and increases their engagement with the game we all know and love. Thank you for reading.

See attached picture for details.

I do believe such functionality could be accomplished using the in-game macro system, assuming a "slow move" action was implemented. You could bind it to whatever chord you'd like, or heck even just replace WASD with it if you'd like and have the chord be for moving quickly. Like how sprinting works in many other games!

This idea adds more flexibility to my original idea, as it allows the cancellation effect to apply to *any* power, which is certainly nice! Thanks for the idea! EDIT: Although, now that I think of it, this solution would not resolve @Saiyajinzoningen's issue. For that problem there'd need to be a "negative speed" enhancement, as nulling out / cancelling a travel power would defeat the purpose of picking that power in the first place. However, a negative speed enhancement would allow for slowing it down, which addresses both my concerns and theirs. Are there any other powers that might be suitable or typical targets for the Null Origin enhancement?