Monos King

That's a great question. I would say most MMs don't have a strong role on teams, but when there is an AV encounter they can really contribute to damage, assuming their pets don't die the first, second, and etc seconds in. Outside of that, they struggle to keep up with the quick pace of teams annihilating what is in sight. We all know there are a hefty amount of MM issues though, and the devs are working on them already. I don't play controllers. Some of the people I know used to. But they stopped, because they didn't feel there was much a point. From what I gather, many controllers have some pretty nice contribution to teams at the much lower levels, but once their team mates start really coming around their role is muted. The tanks were invincible at around 30 and collected maximum aggro, and the stragglers were obliterated along with the main enemies in seconds by blasters rinsing their nukes. Scrappers were kind of a mix of both. There didn't seem to be much room for "controlling". Speaking of which, everyone I know that plays Widows dropped them and decided they were just an ineffective amalgam of uneeded CCs and weaker scrappers. I actually disagree with that one, but putting it out there. There seems to be a brief period of like 39-44 where there is generally agreed efficacy in teams again (depending on the enemy groups that are being fought) but then that tends to disappear entirely in the next level when incarnates are a factor, and the greatest contribution is another wave of judgement. At level 50 and beyond, defenders (that don't offer +dmg or -res) have significantly less value, but I don't consider everything being easy when we're all maxed out to actually be a problem. I really have no idea what Sentinels even do. I assume they can take over the nuke everything route when blasters aren't around. When blasters are there...well I've seen complaints. Like I was saying, some people are content to just play and don't notice or don't care about this effect, but I do think it's there. I'll also acknowledge that if the team play involved the more deadly enemies in those upper levels, it would be less of a concern. But those enemy groups are rare, out of the way, and offer no greater rewards. Most players cruise on past them, accrue enough power to overcome them just as fast, and at that point DPS is the dominant strategy. The players that weren't progressing as fast, or don't have dps generating means are just not as valuable. The solution then to appeal to this side that feels less valued, is not to nerf anyone, but to give them a greater role through various means.

Slightly unrelated, but I was playing on the hyper OP server formerly called Cake, and was absolutely delighted at what I could do. Cake is characterized by SUMMONING AN ARMY OF ENHANCEABLE ELITE BOSSES and literal tyrant powers and of course And I was enjoying challenging myself by soloing Magisterium, and Hami, and other ridiculous things. No matter how exceedingly OP you get, you can probably create a challenge for yourself in this game. So yeah, simply being strong isn't an issue if what you're looking for is a way to challenge your build. If what you want though, is to join any team and be able to effectively do your thing there, it's likely you'll find some obstacles in the form of people being way too strong to need you. Even though cakes insanity is fun and you can create a challenge for yourself, as you might expect...team playing is completely dead. Greater individual strength negatively affects individual efficacy in groups, and because you can rack up that individual strength quickly, you get people that aren't entirely happy. I think at the end of the day it does come to a matter of values. Some players just enjoy playing. Indiscriminately, unconditionally, will-never-PvPingly. And they find fun in whatever they erect for themselves. Others are a bit more particular. As long as one side doesn't intrude on the other, I think it should be fine for us to just look at options like this.

This is natural, and a byproduct of both Nash Equilibrium and Dominant Strategy of Game Theory. As a result, doing anything else when these options are available quickly becomes "going out of your way", so I wonder if everyone actually enjoys those Architect farms, or just finds the rest of the game to be a hassle. I'll admit I do find that to be an immense shame, as there is a lot of content that makes the game special that is skipped over as a result of it. But people at the very least seem to like it, and that sort of things been staple since the game began, so I see it as fine. This is true. But a lot of players don't want to glide through content - more specifically they don't want to be carried through content. One of the recurring reasons easy progression is an issue for some is the lack of role efficacy; I.E. not feeling needed on teams. We're looking for ways to address that without intruding on people who like the game at it's existing level of "difficulty", while also offering some amount of tactic. Here's a brief recap of those. 1) Customizable Incarnates courtesy of @Snarky In exchange for lowered strength, you can alter the stats (or even nature) of incarnates. This would be done via an accompanying "side" slot option, or perhaps via a different slot altogether, and may or may not require additional salvage to do so. Will be entirely mutually exclusive with ordinary incarnates. 2) Incarnate Alternatives (Breakthrough) Similarly in exchange for much lower potency, the option for more thematic and versatile end-game augments that are also mutually exclusive with incarnates. These are more in line with strong temporary powers, and are perhaps unlockable separately via conventional (non incarnate) progression and crafting. Characters that take breakthroughs are not incarnates and can't become them, but will still have similar level shifts in trials so they can participate in them. Through the use of appealing alternatives, content would not be as saturated with game breakingly powerful characters, mitigating concerns of feeling unneeded in teams. 3) Increased means of lateral progression courtesy of @Luminara Engaging in certain content is increasingly incentivized via additions such as additional souvenirs and unlockable emotes. In my opinion these options shouldn't be put in Ouro (much like a vast amount of temporary powers) but that would need community review. This takes inspiration from the affect badge hunting sometimes has in content, and while people would probably still just skip over that content and revisit it at higher levels, it might still lower progression speeds. People also might just like the additions. If players have more reason to slow the quick climb to extreme power, then lower content will be less saturated with those that have extreme power. 4) New mechanics or enemies Mechanics that encourage thoughtful encounters amongst enemy groups would be one's that pretty much say "hey, you shouldn't just try to burst dmg these guys. There's more to it". This could be things like holds that disable high resistances or auto powers(courtesy of @oedipus_tex), debuff auras, dual victory conditions, or other possibilities. Maybe even we could get endurance drain to be useful by facing enemies with a pesky ability than will deactivate if the enemy loses a certain amount of End. Obviously we wouldn't be creating encounters that REQUIRE other roles; it wouldn't become impossible to overcome a certain boss with just blasters, but it would become so much easier with a source of mez or a certain strategy that you would be a boon if you could provide these utilities. If certain roles can find greater use compared to DPS, extreme power will be less of something that renders others useless. Some honorable mentions; I would love to see this idea in a mostly preserved form once the kinks are worked out. As it stands, the big issue is certain TF enemies are fixed at 54, which would make those that don't have incarnates endure greater difficulty than before. If those were adjusted, I think this stands to have genuine community consideration. This isn't particular to the point of this thread, but quoted for truth. When things are made more difficult, there should be a little something extra to incentivize doing so.

That is the position this thread has been primarily focused on breaking down, explaining, and remedying. I believe this is the 8th entire I'm saying this, but I also don't think the game being easy is bad; it's better for some of our delightfully weathered community. But it is also a problem for others, so looking at means to offset the actual problems easy progression creates (people feeling like they don't have worth in teams, people not feeling like rewards are worth anything because they came too easily) is worth doing. The thread has long progressed past this point, and there is not a point on it I have dodged. Snarky himself has moved on, and we have thought up some interesting ideas in the actual spirit of the thread. I will not humor this comment.

Your opinion is appreciated. However, I also understand you probably haven't read this thread, as it very much is not any of that. If you would like and are interested, I can try to go back and quote some of the major points.

I think it works to most of the players benefit, if what you said now is any indication. That being said, I would like to keep exploring options to ensure the sense of meaningful role in groups, even the powerful ones. That way we'll have new content that's both different, and enjoyable for a part of the population that might've otherwise found it not so enjoyable. Posts like yours are a gentle reminder that not everyone is challenge obsessed though, and helps keep everyone in check respectfully. Appreciate the responses!

This is true, and it's only expected considering human nature. You want to use what's available to you, why wouldn't you. And it plays back into the idea of dominant strategy earlier discussed (you'd want to scroll down on that link) where it's only natural you do what is most effective. Standard progression would probably also not include getting attuned IOs as you level and accruing mighty stats by only level 30, but that's actually very common now. Amplifiers are also about as guaranteed as enhancements, as are pay2win temps, so it would make as much sense not to get them as it would to not enhance. As such, here we are. I'm going to admit one thing though, I really hate PvP IOs dropping outside of PvP. That really sucks to me, for a variety of reasons. I wish they didn't. It also plays into what we're talking about here, those PvP unique are pretty powerful. But if I'm being honest, that one I hate primarily just because it deincentivized one of the lead reasons to step into PvP.

I try my best to steer away from the conversations that are that discussion, because it is very much not what is being examined in this thread. Some of that will leak in inevitably since the subject of difficulty is apart of it, but I want to emphasize that that isn't my goal here. Looking at progression as a whole is, and the impact of said progression. Once we're maxed out the game will be easy, and as Faultline noted, this is the case in all games. But being able to become that powerful isn't an issue, it's awesome. It's just that getting there is so guaranteed, that the consequences of said power (IOs, attuned IOs, incarnates) trickle into lower content. You're not wrong, though. The praetorian enemies are far more challenging to navigate, as are rularuu. Vanguard Sword is one of my personal favorite, those guys are beasts. And lower level content on it's own doesn't have the biggest offender (incarnates) so it's still an experience that has a good panel of obstacles.

We can ignore those guys, rewards aren't going to be reduced like ever so there's no point in even humoring it regards of the potential consequences of doing so. I know there's a swimming dog somewhere sniffling about it, but we all know that ships sailed.

I'd like a weapon accolade that does immense dmg and -regen to non-humans.

For sure. I'm still at a loss as to what mechanics specifically would help to offset it though, and which would be received the best. What comes to mind is Hamidon mitochondria though.

I don't feel useful in the auction house because Yomo's too busy monopolizing it.

In a vacuum yes, but in this case they aren't feeling useful exactly because of an element relating to said ease - that being DPS hyper meta, unkillable characters, and the near immediate access to this extreme damage and nigh unkillableness. You might make encounters go faster with your debuffs (if the enemies aren't one shot), and you might make someone only lose a 4th of their health instead of a third with your buffs...but your presence really didn't change the tide of the fight, or cause a beneficial strategy change. You might not have even used an attack on enemy before it fell. Take kins for example. A best case scenario of having the efficacy I'm talking about. We like damage. If you're on a team of unkillable tanks for some reason, a kin will literally be able to change how fights are approached. Instead of all of them needing to band together to kill an AV in effective time, after some fulcrums and speed boosts they'll be able to split, take on the AV with less of the team, and have the others deal with other objectives. But actually, all of those tanks are actually mega strong and could already do that, so a kin would just speed up whatever process is transpiring. This is a best case scenario because of how important damage is, and while a kin would be enjoyed, what they bring is mostly expendable. This is significantly exacerbated when what you bring to the table isn't some means of increasing damage. If you're on a team of health unmoving blasters, what good are you the mind controller? And why are they all so strong? Because progression was very easy. But again, I'm not clamoring for any buffs to enemies or nerfs to players. I think other mechanics will do the trick just fine. I do want to explain the perspective, and its source. There isn't any issue with the fact we can get super powerful, but I do think there is validity in noting how easy it is to get there.

Keep in mind I'm still primarily reviewing methods to reduce or exchange overall effectiveness (to maintain role efficacy and all), but I'll admit that sounds interesting. Particularly the range doubling element. I would like to see things like double range in exchange for halved strength, for instance. But I'm definitely not resistant to the ideas, because outside of the focus of this thread these are good suggestions in general.

We'd pretty much definitely need to already have plans for like next level incarnate content if we did actually end up opening up the later slots though. Did you see some of the drafted ideas for them in the AMAs? They were like hilariously insane: nuke level AoE debuffs and chance for one shots. I'd love to see how crazy it would get but first I'd need some toys to test them on. This one would be unpopular, but they'd probably have to be limited to said new content or have exceptionally long cooldowns outside of it in exchange for them being as awesome as I'd hope. I just can't see it being any other way consider what existing incarnates already spells for content now.

True, dev time is always kind of the presiding factor. But they have (even in this thread) expressed that if it's popular and desired, it can happen...eventually. So if something like the customizable incarnates we're talking about now somehow got a universal A-Okay, I think it could happen even on the time budget. I hadn't even thought about something as simple as customizing existing incarnates in exchange for reducing their overall performance though, that's a pretty neat thought. Of that line of "incarnate alternatives" that means we have that idea, and then the breakthrough idea from earlier that I still don't know what would consist of. Do you think a customizable incarnate would be an entire new slot to unlock, or just take perishable materials to do so?

That, but also the implementation would probably be seen as a solution to a problem. I don't like to think of it as matters of "problem and solution" and instead view it as "appealing to preferences", but the mere installation of something like this would probably leave a bad taste in mouths. One that opens floodgates to incarnate nerfs. That's my prediction, so we'd have to address that's not what's happening. Because I genuinely think it should be fine. There's also the matter that all the higher end TFs and similar content (not trials) would have to get changes to not have certain enemies unfixable from level 54. Because not everyone is an incarnate, and so that content would be like fighting 55s now. Not sure if it would take a lot of effort to go in and do that, but that could fix that issue. Edit: unless I misread and level 54s aren't getting any stronger with this proposal.

I kind of like this idea, it's interesting. But I also feel like it would be hated and no one would want it.

That sounds pretty fun to me, I think that kind of addition would be cool. And yeah, it probably wouldn't be an answer for everyone, but if it's something that doesn't give reason to object, I would put it on the list (assuming devs pick up the interest in it). This sort of de-incentivizing of what makes progression so quick is actually a great perspective. If the means exist, but few people really want to use said means, because of whatever appealing reasons, the saturation of power would weaken.

No I mean that's literally not quantifiable; they may or may not decide to use it, and their usages might vary. This isn't my personal group of buddies I'm talking about. Not everyone is the exact same, I can't make a blanket statement to that extent "every reward chaser is using pay2win powers, double XP booster, and power-leveling" or not, and trying to do so would be extremely disingenuous. And even if I did go and ask every single one I know, there's definitely going to be some I don't know that differ. Frankly, whether or not they do doesn't change anything...it's just kind of an assumed position that you created, and then claimed if they DO hold that position, they can't feel the way they feel. In that event, I direct you to my analogy. What I can do is make assessments about how they feel because some of them brought those concerns to me in the first place, and then create a classification based on that. If you're interested, I just asked you about factors that you think might be more verifiable/relevant. The thread title refers to the presentation of my OP, where I describe why progression in the game is easy. As for trying to convince others their concerns are misplaced, please show a quote of me doing this. Please show a quote of me doing this.

Well, I can't speak to whether or not the reward chasers are using power leveling, amplifiers, and double XP boosters. I can give my analogy from earlier, however.

Well, I was trying to divide two groups of players that specifically are prone to complaining about the game being easy. I haven't seen any alt-o-holics ever complain about challenge or difficulty; probably for reasons you just disclosed. My observation is that the easy game sentiment seems to stems from those types the most, not that everyone within those categories feels that way. Definitely didn't intend for it to come off as though those are the only two types of players. That being said, the category of a reward chaser in particular could definitely be fleshed out. I've mentioned badgers before previously a few pages back when I first defined the two groups, and I missed a bit since the above section was just a recap. By "rewards" I'm pretty much referring to those that increase character stats and utility. Yeah there's definitely more variables to consider. What other factors did you have in mind?

Then you are free to go to one of the many "The Game is Too Easy" threads and impugn the conversations there. You can also look at my opinions in other threads. If you're here, I expect you'll read what is being said rather than tangibly obsess over actual conspiracies about my motivations when I have been exceedingly transparent - through both short synopsis' and also walls of text. It would be pointless to disguise my meaning when I could easily make a thread called "Make the Game more Difficult". It is childish to continue assuming deceit just because you disagree with an existing opinion which I have labored to break down and review solely because I have noticed said opinion, and wanted to discuss options with that opinion in mind. Quit categorizing people without looking at what is being said. Stop assuming bad faith. Find me a single time I have asked for "jacked up difficulty". While I have explicitly stated I believe progression in the game easy, from a point of literal definition, and have looked at why, I have also explicitly stated that I do not personally have much issue with that. I am looking at options that could be interesting that might appeal to those that genuinely DO, and would be cool with those who enjoy the status quo, because even if within your limited sphere you think everything is ok, that does not mean it is the case for everyone. If you are incapable or uninterested in reading my breakdowns, then do not comment. If you are going to ignore all of that and then misconstrue my point anyway, then do not comment. The plague that is overtaking this thread is an immediate antagonization towards an opposing opinion, and is such a disappointing representation of the community it's actually upsetting. If the thread is too long for you to keep up with, ask me to quote something. Don't do this.

The idea wouldn't be to make fighting the enemies more difficult in the sense of increasing their stats or weakening players, so there wouldn't be any change in "difficulty levels". Recall the fights in certain encounters with say Ajax. It isn't hard, but there are things you need to do in order to damage him. Also take fighting something like tsoo. They can be quite challenging when you aren't familiar with their abilities, but once you know to aim for sorcerers, you can begin dealing with the rest. (At least when you aren't on a team that will just DPS them into oblivion.) That sort of thing. More thoughtful, not necessarily more difficult, encounters. Primarily surrounding the definitions of difficult, challenge, and progress as I highlighted in the OP. Not quite. I've said this a few times now, but the ease I'm reviewing is one of progression. For pretty much all of the reasons I highlighted previously, another "setting" won't do anything. In this games glory, people already have the options of settings, but the sentiment of "too ease" still exists. I'll again define the reward chasers and role-players. It is within these categories of players you will find "game too easy" sentiment the most. Reward chasers want their rewards to come at a price, and want things to feel earned. They aren't challenge hunters, they are ease haters. Their motto: if it comes easy, it's worth little. Feel how you want about them. Role-players are the players you might typically associate with "traditionalists", but really they just want to feel like they are contributing to teams they join. Progression holds an element of ease because rewards come easy, and roles are expendable. So you progress through the game very quickly. When you deconstruct what they are actually complaining about, it is an issue of efficacy and expediency. I doubt we can do anything about expedience, there's a lot of ways to move through content and levels quickly. Not to mention people like it. I do actually empathize with reward chasers, but I think that the proposed strategic encounters will make them feel the rewards were truly earned. In short, if the game stays easy (about the same as it is now) challenge wise, but everyone still has the ability to feel useful then I think both sides will be appeased. That I think we can do, if we come up with good ideas for it.

Actually, a few people have discussed how this game has been practiced and that contributes to overcoming content easily, but that just had little to do with the idea of progression being easy. Edit: Couple things that definitely made an impact though. 1) Higher accessibility of IOs (I don't just mean prices, I mean like PvP IOs dropping in not PvP content) 2) The very existence of attuned enhancements 3) Event IOs And other matters discussed earlier. And then of course there is the fact we've gotten the game down to a formula. That formulaic feel is one of the reasons I like the idea of tactical enemy groups and mechanics. In my opinion, it would be fun.