BelleSorciere
-
Posts
190 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by BelleSorciere
-
-
You can defer taking the portal to finish those arcs as well as level above 20 in the process. I just took a level 22 Resistance character to Paragon last night.
The weird thing was that the mobs would only spawn up to level 20 and no higher, but that's still the 20-24 range.
-
28 minutes ago, golstat2003 said:
RIGHT?!
It's like "dudes, we know, move on . . ." LOL
That long speech and then Aeon turns out to be an elite boss
what a loser
-
The cut scenes in MLTF and RTF just make me so tired
-
5 hours ago, SwitchFade said:
Please keep in mind, the onus of a persuasive argument is on the person making the case for change...
Hence, working as intended is absolutely legitimate, because those of us who are fine with it have absolutely no burden to even justify it or argue anything.
The burden lies on the person who is advocating change. Convince me, or...
No vote, working just fine 😋
"Working as intended" is not an argument in this case. I explained why the intended working isn't great for as it turns out, many more people than myself. If I say "this game mechanic as intended isn't doing its job," responding with "working as intended" completely fails to engage the argument as much as telling people to ask the team leader to turn the difficulty down. It's not engagement, it's just clutter and adds nothing.
Since the content of your responses seem to boil down to "nuh uh" I won't respond further. Have a nice day!
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, UltraAlt said:
Yes, lore is a game mechanic when it is what the mechanic is based on.
And I do understand that the sidekick doesn't have all the powers that they would have if they were actually leveled to that level.
There is no quality of life issue with the sidekicking mechanic. I didn't think there was a problem with it before the Homecoming improvements.
When it came out, it was a huge innovation to MMORPGs. It allowed you to team with your friend even when you weren't high enough to run their missions (because it made you a high enough level to do so).
Even a DEV has used "working as intended" on me here. So yeah. That appears to be intended to be a persuasive argument.
If you don't like being sidekicked, then run missions on your level and make your teammates exemplar down to you or get PL'd by a fire farm in the AE.
It's not a QoL issue or problem.
There clearly is a quality of life issue that I described and others have concurred on. That you do not see it as such does not magically vanish it away.
My point was that things are working as intended until it's not intended anymore.
Your solutions aren't solutions to the issue I brought up.
"Lore" isn't a meaningful justification since there is no standard which all sidekicks meet. It's not a mechanical distinction, but a story one. A game does not need to be beholden to genre conventions in books, movies, comics, or TV shows. In general, gameplay needs to be enjoyable and not punishing. If the outcome is to discourage to discourage people from teaming with higher level characters then there's a problem.
I have my own fire farmer and PL whenever I feel like it, but I shouldn't have to power level every character to 50 in order to enjoy the game, and if that's what you believe people should be doing, I sincerely question your understanding of the game.
More generally, I did in fact outline what the problem was, my proposed solution, and why I think my solution works. "This isn't a problem" isn't a persuasive argument in response to that. It's not even an argument, it's just threadcrapping. Also, making SKs the same combat level as the team leader or mission holder doesn't make them "peers." They still have a lower security level, fewer powers, and fewer slots. Making them the same combat level doesn't make them "peers" or "equals" it just means they hit more often for more damage, longer control, or better debuffs.
-
15 hours ago, SeraphimKensai said:
Personally the only ally level adjustments I think need to be made are making MM pets the same level as their MM (which would fix a lot of MM issues like pets getting left behind in group flight, or simply deleted by +4 mobs). That said, if I'm playing a lowbie and going to run higher than my own level content, I understand that I will likely be in over my head. This concept is shown to us in comics and the MCU as well, like Spiderman stowing away on a spaceship to help Ironman despite Ironman knowing it's above Spiderman's pay grade. Sure he helps as best as he can, but is largely just a distraction to someone like Thantos, whereas Captain Marvel can lay down a beating.
I think the Mastermind pet issue is a glaring issue that needs attention, and it's definitely impacted here more than most ATs.
13 hours ago, thunderforce said:I'm not sure there _was_ a reason, beyond the "sidekick" name. The -1 level on sidekicks is the last vestige of the bad old pre-Super-Sidekicking days (and as you note it's especially bad when you're effectively -2 in addition to not having boffo incarnate powers, and worse yet when you're a mastermind with pets at -3 to the team leader); there really is no reason not to make everyone in the team the same combat level at all times.
Yeah the -2 thanks to the +1 is weird. I don't see an issue with being -1 to the incarnate shift so much, though.
9 hours ago, UltraAlt said:So if we look to comicbook lore, the whole point of a sidekick is that they aren't at the same level as the hero.
They would be a partner or ally if they were on the same level.
Sidekicks *aren't* the same level even if they're fighting at the same combat level. "Lore" isn't a game mechanic, nor should it be one that causes quality of life issues. A lot of things in CoH were working as intended like exclusive toggles (Invulnerability, Stone Armor, Dark Armor), perma-unstoppable, and controller AOEs that could permanently lock down entire spawns. The ability to herd and AOE things down with no AOE limits were also based on mechanics working as intended. "WAI" is not a persuasive argument.
6 hours ago, SwitchFade said:Word.
SK system, to me, works fine. This is classified as...
Operator Error... On the part of the team lead
Nope. Also, not an argument.
-
The purple patch from before issue one was implemented to encourage players to stick to fighting mobs within four levels of themselves. The current SK system, whether level 50 or lower TFs/SFs, can and does put people into a position where they're fighting +5 to their level. +4 wouldn't make them significantly more powerful, but it'd make teaming less painful without insisting that people change their play style or just not play certain characters with their friends.
Notoriety made it so people could fight anywhere from -1 to +4 their level, regardless of the number of team members.
I think that the -1 level has been out of date ever since the purple patch and the addition of notoriety.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, krj12 said:
Most level 50 TFs advertise whether they're running at +4 or not, if you're not comfortable running at that setting, just don't join that team?
This doesn't address my suggestion and isn't constructive. The point of my suggestion is to change how sidekicking works across the board. Asking individuals to take individual action isn't a real alternative, just a way to compensate for the current game mechanic works.
I usually go on TFs with my SG, with people I've played CoH with since before sunset. If I do team with people I don't know, it's always on a character in the relevant level range.
-
11 hours ago, Greycat said:
You asked why that exists. I said why I think it exists. You are a sidekick, you are learning from your mentor. IE, flavor.
I don't know where you got everything else you threw in that reply from what I said.
The rest of it was a general response to other replies. I do apologize that I wasn't clear that the entire post wasn't a response to you. I do agree it was likely a flavor decision, I just think that the game's changed a lot since then (and sidekicking itself has changed a lot as well).
Also the decision that sidekicks be -1 was made before launch so is a bit decrepit given the current game, how difficulty functions, etc.
To the current discussion:
The sneaked in stuff looks like an interesting way to go.
-
Frost Breath and Fire Breath in Ice and Fire Blast respectively have always felt like they have little to no impact. Frost Breath especially.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, golstat2003 said:
Eh, just ask the leader or team if they would not mind running at a lower level.
No:
4 hours ago, BelleSorciere said:I know there's always people who push back against suggestions with comments like "Just have the leader set the level lower" or whatever and I'm not going to engage that.
-
1 minute ago, Razor Cure said:
Uh..what? I never SAID you said it. Try to keep up. You are moaning the sk mechanics impact team and TF contribution. And totally blaming said mechanics..not the people who join as lowbies.
And in both cases, the sk mechanics really do not have negative impacts, unless the person is question is super under leveled. Begging the question, why are they joining a team that is way higher?
Vindictive is the word I choose, in a sarcastic manner.
'k
-
1
-
-
Just now, Razor Cure said:
So the lowbies who join a PI AV team, arent useless because they have 5 unslotted powers..but because the mechanics are vindictive? Yeah, ok.
Also, a ALL task forces auto SK now anyway. If its say a lvl 35 TF, and ONE player at the 30 min ends up at 35 (I cant even recall..would they be 34 or 35?) and somehow thinks they are usless, there are only a few possibilities:
They just suck
The tf level is set way too high
In either case, the solution is pretty obvious. Either dont join a team with a significant level increase over your own, discuss the team difficulty with team members, and if they insist on running +4 or whatever and you feel useless, leave! Or just create the team yourself.
I invite you to show me where I said the mechanics are "vindictive."
The rest of this is just individual solutions to a game mechanics problem. It's okay to change game mechanics and improve QOL.
-
14 hours ago, Greycat said:
I'd say it's flavor. You're a sidekick, not a peer. Kid Superguy, not Superguy themselves.
It's not flavor. It's a mechanical choice that has a real impact on one's ability to participate in a mission or task/strike force
I know there's always people who push back against suggestions with comments like "Just have the leader set the level lower" or whatever and I'm not going to engage that.
I also don't even slightly care about "people playing ineffective characters leeching XP." It seems to me that could be solved by the leader choosing not to invite them to the team. 🙃 Plus SFs and TFs have level minimums so level 20s can't run ITF as far as I know.
Since SOs are available right from the start I don't think that's really a good argument. Yes characters with more slots and powers are more effective, but if sidekicking didn't penalize players this harshly this would make much less of a difference.
-
Oh I meant 30% vs 48% with the change with the sidekicked character, but yes that's a very good point and I didn't think to compare to the 50 +1
-
After running an ITF on my Dark/Dark controller and dealing with +5 mobs all the way through, I find myself asking what purpose the -1 to team level serves, given the large gap between being -4 to mobs vs being -5. That is, if I read the table correctly, 30% effectiveness vs. 48%. I didn't really feel like I was doing much other than a few buffs and a minor amount of damage.
Due to having a character that relies on control, buffs, and debuffs, I felt less effective than I ever have on any other character, even when sidekicking, and I'm not even sure the reasons for the -1 level are still true in the game today.
-
2
-
-
27 minutes ago, TheZag said:
its not really a quote if you edit the formatting and its really time to move the brute vs tanker somewhere else. this thread is supposed to be about whether or not the game should get rebalanced for IO sets - not nerf/buff tankers and brutes
It is quoting, and doing it that like that - separating it into sections and replying to each individually is called "fisking," or at least it used to be.
-
4 minutes ago, Luminara said:
Not going into another archetype versus archetype debate. Start another thread, or dig up the last one that discussed it (in which i mentioned that Scourge is just as shitty as Vigilance... and neither really plays into procs, though at least Scourge can benefit from the lower HP of targets resulting from random procs triggering, as opposed to the zilch that Vigilance does in respect to procs (they neither use endurance nor benefit from +Damage)).
I'll just point back to this.
1 hour ago, parabola said:It's also the higher modifiers defenders get on pool powers. Between that and higher mods on buffs and debuffs they need to spend far fewer slots on full sets for survival. Much the same thing is true in the tanks vs brutes comparison. Tanks and defenders are much more free to stuff their attacks with procs and it makes a big difference.
-
9 minutes ago, Luminara said:
An archetype which has exactly the same opportunities for slotting exactly the same procs. Procs don't invalidate corruptors simply because defenders have access to them, any more than defenders are invalidated by corruptors using procs. Shitty inherents and poorly differentiated scalars are what create a sense of invalidation between the two, not access to procs, or procs working how they do.
They don't, though? Their primary is stronger than Corruptor secondaries meaning that slotting can have a different priority, meaning that Defenders can more easily slot enough procs to outdamage Corruptors while still buffing/debuffing at least as well and approaching Blaster damage. If Corruptors could leverage procs to the same extent that Defenders can, don't you think they would be?
-
2
-
-
Trying to think of an actually not joking answer to this and it's hard. So much of COH for me is making as many alts as possible. If I absolutely had to pick one it'd come down to my Dark/Dark Brute, my Inv/Dark Tanker, or my Ill/Storm Controller.
-
3 minutes ago, Apparition said:
As I pointed out above, when a Defender loaded with damage procs does almost as much damage as a Blaster, there is a very serious problem.I love having six damage procs in irradiated ground but it does seem to be a bit much
-
On 2/1/2021 at 2:35 PM, Mashugana said:
Is there a guide to the numbers I am shooting for when I make a build in Mids?
People keep saying to plan my builds in Mids but I have no guidelines. Are there certain goals you want for all characters (e.g. always get S/L Res to a certain number, always get global recharge to a certain number)? Are there specific numbers for roles (e.g. melee damage characters want X, Domintors always want Y for Permadom).
Thanks for any advice 🙂
I think the only rule you need to keep in mind is that you can only have any given bonus five times before it stops counting.
-
5 hours ago, KC4800 said:
Plus, it can light Oil Slicks.
I miss it on my Brute, but the only use I ever really got out of it was pulling Neuron away from Bobcat for the achievement we didn't even get.
-
The game would be dead to me
-
1
-
1
-
Praetorian arcs
in Suggestions & Feedback
Posted
Is there a difference in story content if you do that vs. leaving for Primal Earth?