tidge

July 12

I really liked Ironheart. It had a good scale, and is obviously in the MCU.

8 hours ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

But for them to get stuck, leave me in limbo, and have to restart is unacceptable.

I see what you did there.

July 11

I don't know if this entirely counts as 'being killed by the developer', but a million years ago I really enjoyed the arena matches of Star Trek: Elite Force 2. It predated (mostly) any form of real-time team communication, and the folks who tried costume mods/hacks didn't really reap any benefits. When teh last servers shut down, I just didn't have the heart to go to another arena system. Elite Force 2 always seemed like a bit of an afterthought, but it felt like the arena servers stayed Live for a long time after the game's release.

Even before that, the pre-2000 MSN Gaming Zone was a time sink, especially to play pick-up card games. It was always fun to find a random partner and dominate at Spades. More than once we'd be accused of cheating, but I think the only common tech that existed at the time would have been something like IRC.

July 11

%proc math for Tankers absolutely needed to be corrected.

After that, I think there were/are some individual powers in sets that needed some hard looks (mostly because there exist powers that were over-performing due to the stats in the powers).

There still are a handful of T9 powers in Tanker Primaries (and other AT secondaries) that should have been tweaked by now, because those practically don't "perform" at all... seriously, if the base timer on an armor T9 is longer than an incarnate Hybrid cycle... something isn't right.

July 11

The set boosts for Accuracy end up on top of the base accuracy of whatever power the set is slotted in... without even considering any global boosts to Accuracy or ToHit.

The Purple sets typically have fewer "Accuracy" boosts, but it is common that 4-slotting a Purple set gives a +15% global Accuracy bonus. A character can have up to 5 of any one such bonus, so +75% global Accuracy from such bonuses is a possibility.

July 11

24 minutes ago, aethereal said:

Your gloss that I proposed "nerfing the Scrapper ATOs so that Scrappers don't outperform Brutes" is a misreading, however -- what I proposed was that the power budget of Scrappers be redistributed from the ATO2 into the ATO1 and the base inherent, primarily for reasons of intra-Scrapper-set balance. Lower the ceiling on the very best Scrapper builds (which are extremely high DPS) in service of increasing the floor on most Scrapper builds.

I gotcha... I don't think that we shouldn't be trying to 'balance' performance (of primaries/secondaries within an AT, or between different ATs) based on an ATO. Especially not with tests like Ston did. I don't really think Ston could have approached things differently (except possibly to get rid of all incarnates) but it necessarily made his results a lot more narrow than the hype around them.

July 11

1 hour ago, Erratic1 said:

Has anyone actually asked for such?

8 hours ago, aethereal said:

Scrapper's ATO2 is really bad design. The fact that it doubles in effectiveness from normal to superior is weird. The fact that it's, like, entirely responsible for Scrapper overperformance compared to Brutes and Stalkers -- that so much of Scrapper performance comes down to this one proc -- is weird. The fact that it's so incredibly sensitive to having a power which has a decently long recharge time and little animation-time-after-effect is frankly kinda dumb.

...

The Superior ATO2 should be dropped to PPM 3 (as it has always claimed it is!) and probably dropped to like +35% crit chance and the Scrapper inherent and/or the ATO1 should get steady bonuses to their crit chance to smooth out Scrapper performance (and lower performance a bit for the best builds).

Also Stalker's chance-to-hide should have the lockdown period removed (and perhaps the PPM tweaked if that means too great a performance).

And Brutes should be given ATOs they can get a little excited about, even if they don't greatly change their performance profile.

I want to point out that @aethereal correctly notes that the ATOs for Scrappers need to be put into an appropriate power and made part of an attack chain... so it's not like a Scrapper ATO being added to a build magically makes Scrappers 'better than' anybody else.

Among some of the suggestions I've seen for Brute ATO's is to give them something akin to the %+Res of the Tanker ATO... which would presumably be to make the Brutes sturdier.

I'm with everyone who thinks the Brute's Fury is lackluster (certainly for high-performing Brutes), but the game has got bigger enhancement balance issues than one middle-of-the-pack ATO.

July 10

I'd want Ernie Bushmiller to handle all of my initial print appearances. Post-Incarnates it would have to be Bill Griffith.

July 10

3 hours ago, Maelwys said:

That said; I agree with Tidge that "Asking for a an improved Brute %proc ATO, to either make them sturdier than Tankers or do more damage than Scrappers is crazy talk".

Thanks for actually reading what I wrote, and not assume that I've got some hidden agenda about keeping Brutes down via (of all things, an argument about an enhancement piece).

To be clear: Brutes aren't hurting for damage or resistance by all the commonly cited performance metrics... so asking for a change from Brute ATO %proc (Brute's Fury) proc to make them sturdier or dish more damage simply isn't needed for performance reasons. Related: asking for a nerf to the Scrapper ATOs so that Scrappers don't outperform Brutes seems to be simply petty. It's not as if my search-fu has found a lot of people asking for the Brute's Fury %proc to be turned into %Energy Font.

I'm not oblivious that there is a limited design space where the Tanker's ATO (Might of the Tanker) makes it easier for Tankers to get to "even better" resistance levels (which may or may not be marginal in totality), when Tankers have an (obviously, because primaries are a thing) easier time boosting certain resistances without leveraging things like power pools and set bonuses... but there is no fungible reward for simply resisting damage. It is more complicated for Brutes to reach certain Tanker levels of resistance... for same armor chosen... but is that some sort of bias against Brutes?

July 10

1 hour ago, Erratic1 said:

Tidge's only concern is keeping Tankers number one by Tidge's standards. Not sure anyone has advocated making Brutes better tanks than Trankers but you can rely on Tidge to object to any and all Brute changes because it might cast the game back into the old days of Tankers being whipped by devils, uphill both ways in the snow.

Brutes not strughling as hard to reach still inferior survivability is not going to supplant Tankers.

Blatant lies. Don't confuse my "there was no reason to change Scrappers/Brutes/Tankers" attitude with someone who thinks "haw haw, this AT should be best." Is this the only concern for Erratic1? Maybe, but I wouldn't attest it to her/him.

If I have an "only" concern its this: Choice of which AT players pick to play shouldn't result in typical content (read: a mission from a contact, like "defeat all") taking times to clear that vary by an order of magnitude.

I have this opinion: fretting about which of Scrapper/Brute/Tanker can "come out on top" in a sub 5-minute challenge to clear +4x8 Arachnos/Council with a level 50+ build is a pretty limited measuring stick, and when the results show those three ATs within seconds of each other there is no reason to boost or nerf any of those three... unless we are nerfing ALL of them down to something like non-changeling Kheldian performance levels (which I am not advocating).

July 10

Ston's test results show more variability among primary/secondary than they do among ATs... so ATO %procs aren't going to address those discrepancies.

You've also got to look at the builds, content and attack chains Ston used... it isn't exactly just focused on primary/secondaries. IIRC if ATO had been removed from the Ston tests, Scrapper times would have gotten noticeably worse, Tanker times would not have changed, and Brutes probably would have gotten worse times, but by how much depends on "how bad/good" the Brute ATOs really are.

July 10

I miss the Eidos Montreal Deus Ex series. It didn't have as much of the possible NPC dialogue as the original, and had slightly less player customization, but it did keep the "many possible paths" approach and it always had fun side quests. FPS "chosen one" games can be a mixed bag for me, but I liked the lore and gameplay of this one.

July 10

I'm happy they are going to launch; I won't be checking them out. Of all the at-sunset ideas for a CoX replacement, Ship of Heroes made the most sense (to me) as a game concept with a practical approach to development. In comparison, City of Titans appears to be a good example of some of the worst "agile development" software projects I've witnessed.

July 10

29 minutes ago, tricon said:

Well maybe theHC devs should take a balancing pass for the underperforming ATO sets. Brutes would be on the list but so are others like the Fiery Orb for Dominators is still something that I consider insulting.

No need to nerf Scappers/Stalkers ATO sets but the others should be brought up to the same lvl.

Scrappers only outperform Brutes on any of the forum-favored tests because of the Scrapper ATOs. Asking for a an improved Brute %proc ATO, to either make them sturdier than Tankers or do more damage than Scrappers is crazy talk. You may as well propose reworking Fury.

I don't disagree that the Brute %proc ATO are somewhat meh, but they aren't the only AT with mediocre %proc ATOs. There are several other types of enhancements that offer far worse options.

July 10

14 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

You're correct that free stuff would not improve my interest in the game--it would remove a time sink associated with getting to the content I actually want to do.

You have yet to share either what content you do play that you don't enjoy, nor have you described the content you (might?) enjoy.... the only clues we have is that you like to use the word grind to describe how you play, and that you think "piles of inf" is somehow necessary to enjoying the game. You seem oblivious that the HC devs have already removed recognized time sinks, like prestige for bases, easy travel, incarnate xp, etc.

July 10

35 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

It's pretty simple. Not everyone has the same priorities that you do.

If you are bored by playing the game your way (i.e. multi-box afk farming, selling items on the market), giving you free stuff is not going to improve your interest in the game... because you've somehow already decided that the game is "3 account afk farming". There is literally a whole game outside of Wentworths and AE that offers all the stuff a player needs to kit out characters, as the player actually plays the game.

Even the level 50 content doesn't need full kits of pricey enhancements... or all the accolades... or whatever... if the desire is to "play with friends" even a small group of friends can tackle a whole lot of content. Nobody is gatekeeping anyone! The HC team has done a great job shepherding the economy so that the things that drop (Inf, recipes, merits, etc.) are trivial to convert into other things players can use. You literally only have to pick some content you enjoy and roll with it. If a player is bored with some content, there is plenty more variety to choose from... a lack of a superior winter set isn't stopping anybody.

July 10

You can't answer any questions, and just want stuff (like "answers") with no effort on your part... I see a pattern.

July 10

27 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

No I never said a brand new player. Longterm players that are tired of the grind.

I know that's hard for you to imagine (you won't even admit there's grind) but they exist.

So your argument hinges on a long-term player that has neither merits nor inf, and is tired of the grind, and wants a full kit insta-50... and also doesn't know how to achieve this... total strawman, or not clever enough to realize they've been grinding the wrong grind. Is this you?

30 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

The Brainstorm argument is a non-starter. People largely continue the game to be around friends and other people in general.

Again, is this you? The long-term players who don't have the resources to insta-50 and insta-slot know which other long-term players to ask for help.

July 9

10 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

Ok so picture your new character progression. After three weeks of whatever it is you do, you have a new 50. Imagine you don't have a vault full of gold available to just drop enhancements in there. So you're going to have to earn it some way. What's that going to take, another couple weeks to grin...err "play the game" in order to afford the stuff. So maybe a month and a half total effort to get a fully slotted 50. For a casual that wants to play a specific lvl 50 build, that's a month and a half of bullshit just to get to the content they want to do.

You are inventing a strawman: a brand new player that doesn't want to play the game and jump to 50 and buy the world. If a new player wants to play, they will accumulate stuff for their character.... if they get to 50 it will be even easier.

*If* that "casual" strawman becomes a real boy... because somehow they "see through the bullshit"?... there are plenty of guides how to generate inf to buy the world.

If a player wants to casually experiment with a level 50, and have everything free... there is Brainstorm.

The game is already offering everything you want for this ever-shifting argument.

July 9

1 minute ago, battlewraith said:

What is the value of the enhancements that you are dropping into the character?

Winters, ATOs and level 50 Purple/PvP recipes I just buy with merits (if they haven't been dropped)... so I guess 450/360 Kinf per Purple/PvP crafting fees? I keep salvage in the base, so I rarely have to use the AH to get any. All the merits (and catalysts) come from just playing the game.

I don't really track what they'd cost if I went only to the AH. If there is a loose piece a build needs that I don't have on hand I typically just bid 2 Minf for it... but knowing my own preferences I pretty much always have such pieces (or their recipes, when I want level 50 versions) on hand.

My main character probably averages about 100 Merits a day (I don't join Hamidon raids, which would make this trivial)... and merits are a really inefficient way to get all this stuff... but just that one character is sitting on over 9000 merits and 630 Hero merits, not to mention the almost 2000 prismatics, hundred of catalysts, and well over 1 Binf (I do sell stuff on the AH). Typically new level 50s spend about 400 Merits on boosters... but anything leftover gets turned into pieces for future builds. As I noted, I have a handful of other characters I also enjoy playing, they don't hold as much, but they are pretty close.

Aside from a short period of active marketing years ago, new characters have been completely funded by drops from existing characters.

July 9

Watch! This is how to answer a direct question:

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

How much do you usually spend on builds and how long does it typically take you to outfit one?

For quite some time, I've been tossing a new character 60Minf + 1 Hero Merit, and then inviting them to the SG.

At level 1 I usually buy travel powers, some AoE temp attacks, 3x8 hours of buffs... they usually have something like 30 Minf leftover, this is their 'kitty' to play with. The Hero Merit is strictly to convert into things like unslotters/converter roulette, until the character has accumulated merits from playing content.

I don't have many alts, and I like playing them, so it is very typical for me to earn 10 levels of the course of a week. "Outfitting" involves popping into the SG base and picking up enhancements... so maybe 10 minutes? The level 50 respec takes slightly longer, but that is mostly because the new level 50 is dropping in crafted IOs (that will be catalyzed or boosted), to leave enhancements for the next character.

Along the way I am vendoring/crafting/AHing drops. Typically by the time I'm level 50 the character has more than the original 60 Minf gift... and I've have weeks of fun play.

July 9

I'm forwarding these suggestion to the City of Titans team, I hope implementing them doesn't delay the next patch.

July 9

43 minutes ago, Ghost said:

Anyways.

You know full well that I’m talking about video games.

If you don’t know the answer, there’s no real reason to chime in.

Have you no idea what a grind it is to earn the 100Kinf to buy Flying Disc from S.T.A.R.T.? Fun is ruined!

July 9

There is one area of the Tanker v. Brute discussion that I feel obligated to point out, and (slyly) point fingers at the HC team who made a big change to the game (that I like!) but sort of gets ignored. What I write below has echoes of @ZemX comments about "what content and play style does the dev team even think about?"

The fundamental difference between Tankers and Brutes is that Tankers get an offensive secondary, while Brutes get an offensive primary. Until Tankers start getting their attack chains, not to mention slots to go in the attacks... there is zero chance for Tankers to outperform Brutes in terms of clear times... unless the Brutes are somehow skimping on their own offensive options. When the HC Dev Team lowered the levels at which higher-tier powers (and Epics/Patrons) could be selected, they further shrank the parts of the game where there is a clear difference between these two ATs that often get compared head-to-head.

As @Maelwys points out just above: Tankers have a little bit more wiggle room than Brutes for 'surviving' ... but as can be demonstrated by Scrappers, with a lower level of survivability than both Brutes and Tankers and access to the same armors, for a lot of content it is the damage that contributes to faster clear times (and thus in-game rewards).

That we had (per Ston) three melee ATs all being able to finish specific non-tivial content within seconds of each other, despite their different areas of nominal excellence and build choices, was to be celebrated.

July 9

30 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

Lol no. Personally, I'm interested in character builds and how they perform. Gathering resources is requirement for making these builds. If you're not Ritchie Rich marketmeister, a massive farmer, or someone who just plays all the time--you're going to have to grind the necessary resources.

No character starts with the ability to slot enhancements, except for the free ones from START. I have a deep suspicion you are tying your personal assessment of "performance" as a finished level 50 build. If you just want to test performance, Brainstorm offers everything for free.

33 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

You are literally the only person I've ever spoken to about this game who is like "grinding? Gosh what is that?"

And doubling down on the "clever ways" to avoid grinding in this phenomenally easy game is just so silly. The issue is time sinks, not being clever. Maybe you play with cheap builds or don't make that many alts or something.

What content do you consider to be a time sink? You've been extremely circumspect about what content you choose to play in CoX. You keep using the word "grinding" but your are describing "playing".

July 9

1 hour ago, Warboss said:

So after all is said and done. Tanks got nerfed. Did that resolve "the Brute" issue? Because the few Brutes I play still clear faster than my Tanks. I don't recall my Tankers ever clearing faster than my Brutes. Even so, what's instore for Brutes? Should they get buffed or modified, we'll be back in the same loop we're in now. I just don't see these changes (maybe aside from the proc issue) really resolving anything (other than impacting my enjoyment of the game),

Brutes don't need to be tweaked. The only Brute-related issue that comes up is for the %proc effect of the Brute ATOs, but Brutes are already "top performers" by commonly recited play metrics, and the only way that another AT looks like it is doing better than Brutes is the Scrappers leveraging their ATOs. IMO it would be a real stretch to motivate Brute buffs (including ATO changes) considering that the Scrapper AT can only be out-performing offensively with the Scrapper ATOs, and the Tankers get extra surviving out-performance because of the Tanker ATOs. If the Brute ATOs deserve to be reworked (more than some other ATOs) then I think the entire Fury mechanic should end up on the table for being revamped. (i.e. non-starters across the board, or the effort will be half-hearted)

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Events

Store

Articles

Patch Notes

Posts posted by tidge