Lockpick

Is this an accurate statement and, if so, can someone expand on why? I am planning a DB character in the near future and would like to pick the best AT for it.

Thank you for pointing this out. I was wondering why the discussion had turned to Dominators not doing as much damage as Blasters. I was under the impression that Doms were aligned with Controllers and Corruptors were more aligned with Blasters / Defenders. Looking in game the pairings are (just limiting to Corruptor, Dominator, Blaster, and Controller): Ranged Damage Blaster Defender Corruptor Crowd Control Controller Dominator Support Controller Defender Corruptor Pets Controller Dominator Where did the idea come from that Dominators are one of the damage sets? When you look at the character creator they show: Dominator: Survivability: 3 Melee Damage: 6 Ranged Damage: 6 Crowd Control: 10 Support: 2 Pets: 5 Blasters: Survivability: 4 Melee Damage: 8 Ranged Damage: 10 Crowd Control: 4 Support: 2 Pets: 2 Seems to me that Doms were designed to be a control set, not a damage set. All that being said, I am just showing the in game data. I have tried playing a Dom and could never really get into it, so I can't really speak to how it plays. Just trying to understand why there seems to be an expectation that Dominators are a damage set.

2) What are the pitfalls of choosing Ninjutsu as a secondary? Not really any as far as I can tell. You get a click heal, click end recovery, and can soft-cap defense relatively easily. This allows you to pick incarnates based on concept or want as opposed to having to fill a gap. I am playing a Katana/Ninjitsu now and the only thing I dislike is the click Mez (Kuji-In Rin), since I make that my one auto-click and it happens in combat a lot which can throw off your attack chain. It also prevents you from making Hasten auto-click if you make Kuji-In Rin auto. It's a great Mez power, I just don't like it as a click. Others do. Same with SR. One pitfall is the KB hole that gets covered by Bo Ryaku somewhat late, but this can be mitigated in the early game with KB prot IOs. Bo Ryaku is good for the + Def procs as well. Shinobi-Iri with Ninja Run or Combat Jumping plus Sprint allows you to skip a travel power. I still took Fly, but you can get by fine with those powers as your travel power. I think it is one of the better secondaries. 3a) Do you have any recommendations on a different secondary to pair with it? (NOTE: For thematic reasons I'd prefer to avoid elemental type secondary choices. She is basically part fox and I can't see a fox with control of Ice, Fire, Radiation etc.) Claws / SR seems popular and would be thematic. Check out @Bill Z Bubba for builds. He does some cool stuff with his Claws/SR and has a lot of experience with the set. 3b) If I could get over the thematic thing, is there a secondary that would be ideal and fun? EA is better than its reputation, Will Power is set and forget, but not sure you need the end with Claws. I think Ninjitsu is fine and I would say give it a try. 4) How does the attack from stealth* work? (I read that you have to be in hide for 20 seconds which seems very long) To me it is hit or miss. It is fine when you are coming up on a new mob and initiating an attack. Other than that I don't rely on it. If you miss your attack you are also taken out of stealth.

Awesome! Thanks all!

The description in Mids says that Shinobi-iri cannot be used at the same time as Combat Jumping, but Mids allows me to have them both toggled on. Can you use Shinobi-iri at the same time as Combat Jumping? I am able in game to use Ninja Run at the same time as Shinobi-iri, so my assumption is that you can, but wanted to check before taking CJ.

I'm not quite 50 yet, but I would guess not, It would be great if someone can confirm. I'm planning on slotting 3 Membrane HOs in Reinforced when I get high enough. Looking forward to see how that works.

I did not know this... I thought you were stacking to get higher damage with the finishers.

I agree. I was thinking of SWTOR where they have the normal flashpoints and operations where they have various levels of difficulty. I think they have a normal mode, hard mode, and maybe a nightmare mode. I wouldn't mind seeing Task Forces having multiple modes like this with different rewards. This way people wanting to do the most challenging content get better rewards and those wanting less challenge get less reward. Seems logical to me and no one is restricted to one type of content. I'm not sure how something like this would be coded or if it would be easy to modify, but it would probably be easier than trying to rebalance the entire game.

Just to add that when I see people talking about balancing around IOs I assume they are talking about standard IOs and not set IOs. I do believe that players can get standard IO easily enough through drops / crafting, but set IOs you have to use the market or merit vendor, so I would expect a certain portion of the population will not have complete set IO builds. I have a friend who absolutely will not market or farm. He plays the game and he will craft his drops, but that's about it. His attitude is he doesn't want to waste his game time playing the market, he wants to play the game. I doubt he will ever have a high end build...

That is interesting; I would have expected it to be lower. Here I expect the percentage using some IOs is higher because everything is cheaper, but I wouldn't be surprised to see that 50% doesn't significantly use IOs.

Another good data point to do some data mining against. How many players actually play this content? I avoid it like the plague and when I do go into First Ward and Night Ward I rarely see other players. Of course, this is true of other zones as well like Croatoa, so could be just a game population thing.

I think there are some good points in this post. I do agree that higher more difficult content should have corresponding rewards. What I found interesting was your point about extra difficulty not being used today. I find this to be true. Very rarely do I get on teams and the team wants to run +4. We might start at +2 and if everyone agrees we might go to +3 and beyond if everyone agrees. If we do start at +4 we often decrease it the next mission. This is obviously anecdotal, but it has been my experience, The key here is we currently have the capability to increase difficulty and it seems that is rarely used. This seems to bolster my point that many people are fine with game difficulty as is. Of course, my experience is anecdotal and subjective. If I was the Devs I would do some data mining to find out how many players run +4/8. I think we will find it to be relatively small portion of the player base. As another anecdotal data point from my personal play style: I run default difficulty pretty much through the leveling process and beyond when solo. I run whatever difficulty setting my team is using when teaming. When I get to 50 I might run higher difficulty settings solo just to see if I can, but since my play time is more limited I like to run my missions quickly. I don't want to spend 30 minutes clearing an Ephram Shah mission so I can get my 10 threads, so faster is better for me.

I need to look at this as I usually only use the shard to craft Alpha T1 to T3 and mostly the T1 and T2. At T4 I go the thread and EMP path.

Would the +5, +6, +7 work if you were level shifted? I was thinking with level shifting that you could basically get back to the original +4 at a new +7? I didn't really think you could go much beyond that, but thought having it further might work with debuffers. You are probably right anyway. I read the purple patch entry in Paragon Wiki, but couldn't see how level shifting would impact it.

No, I don't think it is more than just an opinion. My opinion was that your suggestions were bad for the game. I suggested that there was a word for people who want to make changes that will negatively impact others that feel the game is fine. You took it as a personal attack. Maybe you were feeling guilty about your suggestions once it was pointed out to you that your suggestions would adversely affect others. Maybe the word I was looking for was Enthusiastic! 🙂 I'm not arguing and I'm not angry, so I'm not sure why you are telling me to calm down. You seem to be the one getting a little sensitive because I disagree with you. I am just stating my opinion just as you have stated your opinion. I'm not stopping you from stating your opinion, but I'm not sure why you believe your opinion should not be criticized. I have put my suggestions out there knowing full well I was subjecting myself to having my ideas criticized. People have differing opinions and it is what it is. On your idea to "+4x8Plus++ could be added" I completely agree with this suggestion. This type of suggestion doesn't impact players that like the game as is and provides choices that players can use to tailor their game experience. I am a big fan of choices. The Live Devs already implemented it and I could see just adding additional options as listed below. I assume a number of people would be happy to have these additional options, but who knows? This is the internet after all... Anyway, I am pretty much done with this thread, but I reserve the right to come back and continue stating my opinion whenever I want (at least while this thread is open, it probably should have been closed 30 pages ago). I want to change the level I fight I want to fight enemies that are -1 to my level. I want to fight enemies that are +0 to my level. I want to fight enemies that are +1 to my level. I want to fight enemies that are +2 to my level. I want to fight enemies that are +3 to my level. I want to fight enemies that are +4 to my level. I want to fight enemies that are +5 to my level. I want to fight enemies that are +6 to my level. I want to fight enemies that are +7 to my level. I want to fight enemies that are +8 to my level. And on and on I want to change the number of heroes to which I'm equivalent I think I'm as good or better than 1 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 2 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 3 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 4 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 5 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 6 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 7 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 8 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 9 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 10 standard heroes. I think I'm as good or better than 11 standard heroes. And on and on I want to fight bosses even when solo I want to ONLY fight bosses even when solo I want to ONLY fight ELITE BOSSES even when solo I would like to fight Arch-villains at their full strength, not as Elite Bosses I want to ONLY fight Arch-villains at their full strength even when solo

Nice thread! What is your completion rate and how important is it? ~8% I have 103 characters created with 16 at level 50. For me completion means the character has all T4 incarnates and the 4 passive accolades. I actually track my 50s in a spreadsheet, so I know who I need to work on. I also like to get all the day jobs on my 50s and I have a target of $100M influence for each 50, but I don't use those metrics as completion metrics. I have 8 complete and 8 in progress. I have 2 50s that need Freedom Phalanx Reserve accolade and 2 50s that need both the Freedom Phalanx Reserve and Portal Jockey accolades for me to consider them complete. I should knock those out to up my completion percentage. Does it matter at all? It does to a certain extent or I wouldn't bother tracking it, but not enough to make me feel like I need to complete a 50 fully before moving to another character. I have started a rotation where I will play a character to a certain level and then let him sit until he has full patrol XP. I then alternate between 10 to 15 characters between levels 20 and 49. Sometimes I will be enjoying a character and will continue to play him to 50. I will also usually log in to one of 50s that is in progress and do a Hami raid, or Ephram Shah, or SSA / Incarnate content to get threads or EMPs to keep progressing. I enjoy the journey to 50 because there are so many options for ways to progress, so while completing a 50 is something I like to do I am okay if it doesn't happen immediately. Have you found yourself slowing down after a year or more (or less) of being back in our beloved City? My play time has gone down quite a bit from last year as I was concerned the game wouldn't last and I needed my fix. I still play 5 to 7 times per week, but my session times have gone down drastically. I might just play a Hami raid one day or do a quick story arc. Over the labor day weekend I played a lot, but during normal weeks I would guess my play time is down to less than 7 hours per week. Which I guess might still be a lot more than others...

I loved this post, thank you for taking the time to write it. I have a lot of the same issues with having a concept and having multiple revisions to get to a place I where the character matches what is in my mind. My DP/MC blaster went through so many revisions I used all my earned respecs and had to purchase additional respecs.

Sure, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Have at it. I was just expressing my opinion that your suggestions would adversely affect those that feel the game is fine as is. I'm not sure why you think it is not civil for me to express my opinion, but it is okay for you to express your opinion. Sure, I am just stating my opinion as well. I didn't want to create 3 posts responding to 3 different posters, so I combined them into one post. I think the point is simple. There is a subset of people in this thread that think the game is to easy and a subset that thinks it is fine. Everyone is going to have different opinions. I think it is a little bit of the pot calling the kettle black to state I am being repetitious when I am responding to your repetitive posts stating the game is to easy. Sure, I have stated multiple times in this thread that I think the game is fine as is. I have also proposed solutions multiple times that would not negatively others that think the game is fine as is. I haven't responded since Sunday to this thread because I had basically said all I wanted to say. However, with the game is to easy crowd continuing to state the game is to easy I felt the need to again offer my opinion that I don't think the game is to easy. After all this thread is 54 pages now and I doubt new readers are going to read the entire thread. They may only read the last few pages and may get the impression that a majority believes the game is to easy. I am expressing my opinion again as a counter. Why is it " petty and argumentative" when I repeat that I don't think the game is to easy, but it is not petty and argumentative when you and others continue to state that the game is to easy?

That is your opinion. My opinion is the overall game difficulty is fine as is. So, you tried a buffed ITF and it was "much more difficult". Hmm, that sounds very similar to some of the suggestions people have made in this thread that if players believe the game is to easy they should use the in game mechanics to bolster their play experience to make it more challenging. I'm not sure why you would want to increase the base difficulty though because that would negatively affect all the players that think the game difficulty is fine as is. All of your suggestions have one thing in common: they negatively affect players that think the game difficulty is fine as is. It would be nice if people could come up with suggestions that solve their concerns without negatively impacting others that think the game is fine as is, but it looks to me that most of these players that think the game is to easy are only concerned about their needs / wants and could care less about the impact to the wider community. There is a word for that type of mentality, but I can't quite think of it right now... That is your opinion. My opinion is the overall game difficulty is fine as is.

I haven't dismissed it as a partial option. I think balancing makes sense if you have outliers, but I think this game for the most part is fine as is. My point is that when you balance you are always going to have some happy people and you will make some unhappy. Why not look at options that might make everyone happy first? On another note, it is incredibly insulting for you to suggest I leave because I am making suggestions that I think are for the betterment of the game. Why would I leave? I am incredibly happy with the game as is and have spent a ton of time playing here. I am not the one calling for wholesale changes that are going to affect everyone. When I want an easy experience I can have it, when I want a challenging experience I can have it, I can solo when I want, and I can team when I want. IMO this is the best MMO ever because I can play how I want when I want. My suggestions have no cons that I can see and provides new content for everyone. It seems to me like it should be a win for everyone where wholesale balancing is going to result in some winners and some losers. Like I said above I play with high end builds and I don't think the game is to easy. I'm not looking for another job. I want my game experience to be enjoyable. If I want to do something challenging I can find challenging things to do. Maybe you are just a better gamer than me. All my 50s have high end builds and on some of them I can do +4/8 if I am careful and some I can't and I am fine with that. It sounds like you have a concern with the mechanics then and not the content or the mechanics make the content trivial in your mind. I don't suppose my suggestion would help with that then. You would have to change some fundamental mechanics of the game I guess.

My solution revolves around the players creating the hard mode content, not the devs. I don't see how that is a bad option. The problem with MMOs is that no MMO can create enough content to keep the player base happy. Here, with some tweaks, we could have all the content we could ever play with the appropriate rewards. Of course, if we relied on the devs to create the content it would take forever. The solution I am advocating would require minor updates from the devs. My solution (provided previously in this thread, but re-added here with some additional points): Devs would adjust AE to add more tags and filters, so players can find appropriate content Devs should probably clean up AE and disable or tag missions where the creators are no longer active and the mission is not getting traction HC Team volunteer would create Community AE mission contests with the help of community volunteers Devs would create reward badges and and provide reward merits for players creating and testing content to incentivize players HC Team volunteers would take the content that is lore based and fits the parameters of what the HC team believe are appropriate from a complexity, lore, difficulty standpoint and tag it as Canon content HC Team would set parameters that limit the ability to game the system for inappropriate rewards Only provide rewards at completion of the mission Ensure that there are different enemy types in each mission and sets of missions, so if doesn't become a defacto farm Other parameters as needed Maybe have a monthly contest for canon story arcs that are accepted as Canon content and have quarterly Task Forces added as Canon content; that gives you 4 new TFs per year and 12 new story arcs per year in addition to additional content that may be selected as Conon Content Maybe do something similar for Incarnate content Once content is tagged as Canon it becomes Dev content, so the creator can no longer make adjustments not approved by Devs Give Canon content the same rewards as TFs and Incarnate missions (i.e. reward merits, threads, shards, Astral Merits, EMPs. etc.) Balance the rewards based on appropriate reward levels and adjust as needed If you find that everyone is playing the Council AE mission over and over because they are a weak enemy, lower the rewards The Devs can also make some of the AE Content WSTs to get players to play it Optional Features if possible: Have the player created content be accessible through contacts that are in various zones as opposed to the AE I think this might be much harder than it sounds, but it would be nice to get the player content out of the AE if possible These adjustments will provide many benefits: It should be relatively easy to implement because most of the work is focused on getting the Community to create and test the content It should be relatively easy to maintain (Devs may have to balance rewards occasionally if the data calls for it) It puts more focus on AE and players will realize it is not just for farming Content of many different levels of complexity will be created that should alleviate the concern of players that think the game is to easy because they will be able to play the hard mode content they crave You will never run out of new content, which is always the issue with a MMO People will likely play the content because they are getting the rewards they need for progression It will bring the community closer together because we will be working together to create and test content The Devs will not have to worry about creating content and can focus on incremental adjustments, bug fixes, new power sets, etc. Players will be able to more effectively "own" their play experience as opposed to expecting the Devs to manage their play experience It doesn't cause anger from balancing ATs/power sets to get to some whole game balance (which is impossible in this environment, IMO) that will negatively impact what I would think are a large percentage of the palyer base that are not power gamers and min/maxers looking for challenge

I know in at least one case because I asked the question specifically and was told no by one of the advocates to make the game harder. I also asked again in that post you quoted. No one has provided a reasonable answer (IMO) as to why balancing the entire game is a better option than focusing on players creating hard mode content. One side wants to rely on the Devs to do wholesale balance changes impacting the entire player community and I would prefer to focus on solutions that have no negative impact to the entire player community, but provides new player created content that will provide new content for everyone. If people in this thread advocating to make the game harder are using the existing mechanics to make the game harder I am sure they would be saying why the existing mechanics don't work. They are not saying that, they are just pointing to the game not being hard enough. My perspective is very simple. There is no consensus that I have seen that the game is to hard, to easy, or just right. Just different opinions of a minority of players in this thread. I don't believe wholesale balancing will work because you will get some people that like it and some that don't. What happens if you do all the balancing and then all of a sudden you get a mass of players flooding the forum with threads that the game is to hard? Do you go back and balance again? These players were likely playing the game, having fun, and had no idea that the game they enjoyed was to easy. Then all of a sudden it was much harder and now they are pissed. As a side note I was in game this morning and I was watching the Help channel. Quite a few people were asking for help. Do you think those players feel the game is to easy? It was obviously hard enough that they needed help getting an answer to their questions. You will alienate some group of people no matter how you do wholesale balancing. Again, I am not advocating for no balancing. Some balancing needs to happen, but should be rare and should be for outliers. I am not sure why people are opposed to using the existing mechanics and focusing first on a solution that has limited reliance on the Devs. We should always try to solve our own problems before expecting someone else to solve them for us.

To be honest, I have no idea of the percentages of people that think the game is fine as is, who think it is to easy, or who think it is to hard. I have no clue if the majority agree with me. I suspect that there is no majority leaning in one direction and that all the players are split across several opinions. That is why I suggested doing some data analysis on certain data sets. My suspicion is that the people that think the game is to easy are the power gamers. These people plan out build (which you do quite a bit), spend the inf to get billion inf builds, and then incarnate to T4. I do this as well. For all I know, the vast majority of our player base are power gamers and the existing player base are vets from Live, so they have the knowledge and enthusiasm to make these builds. This could be the case, but I doubt it. And even if it is you are still have some of these power gamers (like me) that think the balance is fine. The Live devs added IOs, IO sets, and incarnates with the intention of building harder content, which would have likely solved all the concerns about the game being to easy. They are no longer here, so that means we either have to rely on the small volunteer HC team to solve our concerns or take matters into our own hands with the tools we have available. Exactly. And the Devs planned to address this with new content, not mass AT and power set balancing. I am not sure you can make that conclusion from this thread. From this thread I see a few of the same people arguing that the game is to easy and I see a few people saying that the game as fine as is and you can use the existing mechanics to make the game harder. From a dev perspective I will just say that just because they are devs doesn't make them right or make their plan reasonable. I would suspect looking at the idea of fixing AE and doing the community outreach around it to drive significance new content has not been looked at by the devs in the details I have mentioned previously. Remember the complaint here is that the game content is to easy. Again, I suspect these complainers are power gamers and no one has suggested otherwise. Therefore, it seems to me that we need to create harder content to address the characters that have invested in power gamer builds (as the Live devs intended). You tell me which is more reasonable and provides more benefit: Spending your time balancing ATs, IOs, IO sets, proces, incarnates, etc. with all the various testing that will be required or Spending your time making adjustments to drive more player developed content that can address the need for players to have Hard Mode content, which has the added benefit of exponentially creating new types of content for all players To me the answer is clearly the 2nd answer and I mentioned the benefits in a separate post. If you focus on balancing it will take forever and will likely lead to some ATs and sets over performing (see Tanker changes).

Maybe an in game poll would be good. I alluded to this earlier, but I will add to it. My bet is that people saying the game is to easy are the ones that planned out their builds to be min/max and are incarnated out. Basically, they made their character into a godlike character and the character plays like a god. Then we are being told the game is to easy for these gods. Maybe a good way to check is do some data analysis on the characters being played. I would look at data around character play time, types of IOs, incarnates, etc. You can then at least see if the majority of active players are incarnate gods. That should lead to some data supported decision making.

I don't know. If the game was super hard and I wanted to play easier content and I had the option to create easier content I would create it. Let's try to remember that we had old school CoH and the Live team set about making it easier because that was what the players wanted. Now we have a much smaller player base with a much smaller team supporting it. You don't have the scale to make the game harder for everyone because many people will get upset and leave. I would really be interested in the percentages of people that believe the game is to easy, those that think it is to hard, and those that think it is just right. My suspicion is that the people that think the game is to easy will be in the minority because they are the ones that have min/max builds, the time to play the game to get the build components, and the inf to buy what they need. Many players don't have those things and work off of SO / IO builds. I have a friend who plays maybe 2 to 3 times a month. His highest level character is about 35 and his build is a basic IO build with some set IOs. He doesn't think the game is to easy. By contrast I have 16 50s and few more on the way. All of them played to 50, not PL'ed. So I play a ton of hours and can afford my builds to be min/max. I think the game can be easy if you min/max, but I also have characters that I build to be mere mortals and I get a challenge when I play those characters. I think the game is just about right. This happens in every game it seems. The minority of power gamers come through and get really vocal that the game is to easy and the voice of the average players are not heard because they don't see a problem and aren't on the forums.