Marbing
-
Posts
619 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by Marbing
-
-
Maybe a different symbol appears based on the type of mez? Otherwise, love this idea and don’t know why it wasn’t thought of sooner!
-
I know this is an old thread, but I think BA definitely still needs a look. Shouldn’t take much. Make most attacks lower target resistance by some small stacking amount and make Pendulum hit more than 5 targets. Both of these changes would make sense thematically.
-
I’ve written literally hundreds of bios. I am a writer and love to write. I’ve written bios for my own toons as well as other people. While it is certainly possible to fit a full story into 1023 characters, increasing the character count does give you more flexibility. I am all for it.
-
1 minute ago, ZacKing said:
It's an option that's available to you right now. You can do this very easily. From the look and sound of it they are going to address these things by doing exactly what they should do - add more content and more options, not nerfing everyone.
Which is exactly what I wanted. So I think we are on the same page arguing for the same thing but somehow don't realize it. 🤣
-
1
-
-
Just now, arcane said:
I’m still dumbfounded at how many people genuinely think good game design is telling people to create faux difficulty by completely ignoring key parts of the game rather than creating genuinely difficulty, but hey you can’t just teach common sense.
This 1000%
-
38 minutes ago, ZacKing said:
Clicking an option to not allow incarnates or buffed enemies IS a self imposed restriction. The game isn't coded to do it automatically. You make that choice man.
C'mon man, that's semantics.
I wasn't referring to clicking options to restrict certain things when I said "self imposed restrictions". I was referring to unslotting your alpha, or choosing to not use IO sets, or choosing to not use any enhancements, and the like to make the game harder (all of these things were mentioned in this thread.) Those are the "self imposed restrictions" I was referring to. It seemed to me there were quite a few people that thought those were the solution, as opposed to adding new content to the game, so I spoke out against THOSE things.
An option built into the game that you can click to make the game harder by limiting your character in some way for certain content or tasks is fine with me (those things already exist as part of the game). But to say "just unslot your alpha" (for example) as a solution, isn't. That is what I was talking about. -
7 minutes ago, kelika2 said:
Yeah but if you opt in to having a challenge its the same thing as a self imposed challenge.
That new content has to be a single option Super Ultra Omega Nightmare Hell DefCon 0.5 only for this thread to make sense
No, it isn't. Because one is the same content, the other is new content. 🙂
-
1 minute ago, Cobalt Arachne said:
New content and special difficulty options are coming that take all those Incarnate powers into account; In the not too distant future you will have the option to face enemies who are more than happy to stomp you into a fine paste even with your Incarnate powers and Level Shift.
But as always, it'll be a choice, but those who endure the peril will get extra rewards for it.This is what I have been asking for and talking about.
Very different from self imposed restrictions! Thank you for chiming in! 😄-
3
-
-
It's more about artificial difficulty vs actual difficulty.
Doing things to purposely gimp your toon is artificial difficulty. Much like wearing a blindfold to play Mario.
Adding harder content or making the current content harder is actual difficulty. Much like adding more enemies per level in Mario (a harder setting) or adding more levels at the end of the game that are harder than the pervious levels.
No one is saying you CAN'T make things artificially more difficult. But, speaking for myself, I don't want artificial difficulty. I want actual difficulty. I want the game to have content that is still difficult WHEN I DO HAVE ALL THE TOOLS, not just when I take those tools away.
I said it before and I will say it again: The single biggest issue with incarnates is the lack of challenging content once you have them.
6 minutes ago, kelika2 said:Your telling me that.. t.. pperalkrhjarhturbbrbrbbr themselves to for up and see the ands?
Dude, you okay? Legit concern here.
-
3
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Apparition said:
A lot of people either don't seem to know Dark Astoria's purpose, or lost sight of it. It was designed to be baby's solo-friendly first exposure to Incarnate content and way to slowly unlock and build Incarnate powers for those who didn't have the time or were unwilling to join Incarnate trials. It was not designed for full teams. It was not designed for level 50+3 Incarnates. It was intentionally designed to get easier as you progress and shuffle you off to Incarnate trials when done to use your new Incarnate power.
This ^ is why the answer is to add more incarnate content. AT MOST I could get behind slowing down the process for going from 50+0 to 50+3, via upping the requirements per Tier or reducing the amount of threads you get naturally through regular content. But, again, that would be AT MOST and even then I can't say I would be entirely for the idea.
The single biggest problem with incarnates is the lack of challenging content once you have them.-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Arctique said:
My guess, to be taken with a grain of salt because it is just a guess based on limited knowledge of the game's code, is that it would be a pretty big undertaking because:
A) As far as I know, the raw custom enemy group files used by AE are only used by AE, so it wouldn't likely be as easy as plucking a custom mob from AE and just adding it to an enemy group spawn list for radio missions. Either they'd need to have some way to convert a custom AE mob into something the game will recognise as a regular enemy group, or rework how radio missions work so that they can create some sort of framework with which they can just stick AE mob files into them, or recreate those custom mobs entirely from scratch as a new group entirely just based on what was made in AE.
B) There is the question of how they'd have to decide which custom mobs make the cut for showing up in radio missions. Like I mentioned above, developer time would need to inevitably be spent not just integrating a new enemy group into the list of which ones can show up for radio missions, but also thoroughly testing any potential groups to make sure they'd be well balanced against the existing vanilla enemy groups. They'd need to be see how they function against different sized teams and solo players, different ATs and powersets, unslotted builds vs. SO slotted builds vs. fully IO'd, builds with and without Incarnates unlocked, etc. Imagine if you were running radios solo on a SO-slotted Scrapper and get a custom mob, only to find they absolutely curb stomp you because they were only tested for 10 minutes using a fully IO'd Incarnate slotted Brute. Testing and balancing would likely take far more time than the actual coding to add the groups.
C) Which enemies appear in radio missions also varies depending on the zone and level ranges remember, so would these custom made enemy groups just appear at all level ranges in every zone? Or would the devs have to spend time considering where specifically each new mob should appear and within what range of levels? Which will require more testing to make sure that an enemy group that's perfectly fine as level 50 mobs isn't going to be overpowered if fought at level 20 instead.
D) Any new feature or update is inevitably going to have its bugs, so that's more development hours to account for as well. You accepted a radio mission with a custom enemy group, only to find that group wasn't added in properly and didn't actually spawn when you loaded into the mission map? Well that's going to be more time the dev team's going to have to take away from other tasks to now figure out what triggers that bug and how they can fix it.
How much they'd be willing to invest the hours into such a feature is something only the dev team themselves can answer, maybe they'll see it as a worthwhile enough addition that it is worth putting the work and the hours in... But game development can be a very lengthy and complex process, especially when your developers are mostly volunteers and hobbyists that have to work with somebody else's decades old spaghetti code.
Just as you said "grain of salt" that also applies to me! 🤣 But I will do my best to address your list with some possible solutions:
A) I know the custom enemy group files are only used in AE, HOWEVER, if you notice in AE you also have the standard enemy groups in there. So if it can go one way it stands to reason it should be possible to go the other. Also, the custom enemies created by players don't behave in any special way that is different from a standard enemy group. They are still bound by the same rules. The only difference is the powers and costumes are chosen for them by the player. If that single difference is enough to make them not portable over to regular PvE content then recreating them would need to be the route you go and recreating an enemy group on source material can't be that difficult or time consuming. You aren't really creating anything new, you are just recreating what's already there with game mechanics, powers, and costume pieces that already exist. Again, grain of salt, because I don't know if that is entirely true, but my guess is that this part of it wouldn't necessarily be overly complicated or time consuming. Didn't they already sort of do this when they created the new "Freakish Lab of Dr. Vahzilok"? I believe there were two entirely new enemy groups added and balanced around lvl 30-39. I could be mistaken.
B) I agree that the time needed to test and balance this cant be understated. Once you have either ported or recreated said custom enemy group (from above) there would need to be some LENGTHY testing of that enemy group. That can be done on the test server by the players during the alpha/beta phases of the patch that would add them. Just make those enemy groups the only ones that spawn on say radio missions (for example, and again ONLY on the TEST server) and have the players hammer them over and over with various build types (SO, sets, Incarnates, etc). You gather the feedback from the players. This would be handled much in the same way as new powersets are tested or how those two new story arcs were tested with new enemy groups and such.
C) The simple solution to this is to see how the enemies were created in AE. You can stagger the level groupings of your custom enemy group, or even limit them to say level 20. If that enemy group was limited in that way by the creator of the enemy group then balance should be set around that level, and I would say take the highest of that level range and balance it around that. For example if someone creates a custom enemy group that is lvl 20-40 then when that group is ported over (or recreated) to PvE it should be balanced around the lvl 40 range and only appear in lvl 40ish zone radio missions (like Founder's Falls).
D) Bugs are inevitable with any and all new content added and as such makes this kind of a moot point. If it's an expected that effects everything then we can safely call this a break even with any other alternative new content that anyone would suggest.
And you are right, it all comes down to whether or not the Dev's view the time spent addressing this is worth the return on investment. Is the juice worth the squeeze? That's what its all about. -
1 hour ago, Arctique said:
It's a nice idea, but there's a lot of problems with figuring out how to implement it and if that would be a worthwhile use of the development team's limited manpower.
This is the part I don't know, we would need a Dev to weigh in on it. Is it something that can be done without massive hours of development time? Maybe we can get one of them to answer if this is even possible? That would certainly decide where this could go.
-
I really like this idea. Anything that could add more content to the game is a huge plus in my book.
As for the logistics, I think we as a community could easily come up with an idea to make this feasible instead of shooting it down immediately. Everyone who plays this game has created content, simply by creating their character. Others have gone even further and created entire enemy groups! Others still have gone even further and created non-farming enemy groups complete with lore friendly backstories and the like! I am not saying it WILL work, I am just saying that this idea does deserve some thought beyond "Nope, impossible, next!".
We do already have tons of AE content in the game (that is NOT A FIRE / SMASH-LETHAL FARM) that can be pulled from. The Dev's already host AE contests (as mentioned earlier in this thread by @Bionic_Flea) that right there could be one way this could slowly grow. As to how hard it is to port an enemy group from an AE mission into PvE gameplay, I don't know. But, it seems to me we already have the systems needed in place to start this thought ball rolling at least. And I am sure there are other's out there that may have some good ideas too, outside of AE content/contests.
Remember: @AlabasterKnight isn't saying lets integrate 100 new enemy groups immediately complete with full backstories and TF/SF's!
The idea would be to slowly, one at a time, start integrating AE enemy groups (non-farm groups) that the Dev's choose (through some sort of contest or content that they have experienced on their own in AE) into the game in some sort of small capacity. Radio's would work because they aren't centered around a story, they are just one off missions. Tip missions could be another way. Then as we start seeing them more and more that can grow into something bigger down the road.So... yeah... start with ONE. See how it works. Go from there. I like the idea, lets figure this out! Also, shout out to @AlabasterKnight for offering his services to help make this happen. I would also be willing to create enemy groups and/or backstories to make this happen. 🙂
-
Yeah KM needs a look as I am sure MOST people agree.
Power Siphon needs lower cast time, no root, and no stack cap, and a small damage bonus immediately on cast. (This will make the power much more interesting.)
Burst, Focused Bust, and Concentrated Strike need to either A) Do more damage to justify their cast times, or B) have lower cast times without changing the damage.
I think these changes would go a long way.
What these changes will do is allow for a player to use the first 3 attacks as builders and Bust, FB, and CS as finishers just before PS wears off and if your lucky CS will give you another PS to use to keep the train rolling!-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, SeraphimKensai said:
It would be cool to have a tiered event that slowly rebuilds Galaxy City. There's construction assets like cranes and I-beams and such, so in theory should be possible.
- Repopulate GC
- Memorial Wall for all that died during Galaxy City's Destruction
- Could transition it to a higher level zone, maybe with Shivans, Rularuu, etc. Like a precursor to Battalion.
That is a cool idea!
-
1
-
If this happens I will be taking Indom Will on SO MANY more toons than I currently do. It is the biggest reason I don't take it over Rune.
-
Are we still waiting on those videos? I am deeply curious what was found in those.
-
1
-
-
On 7/29/2021 at 9:01 PM, Blackfeather said:
After thinking about it for a while, I eventually decided that a chance to Hold probably wouldn't be all that appealing all things considered. So in the end, I went with making this change instead:
Most enemies are susceptible to knockdown, but it also means they're only occupied for about a second or so - a very short amount of time, but hopefully enough to either set up Ice Slick or have Arctic Air affect the group. This should hopefully mesh better with Ice Control's focus on soft control too. Would this be more appealing, do you think?
This could work. Or I was thinking maybe like a super short unenhanceable hold (they shiver for a couple of seconds, just long enough for arctic air to kick in).
-
2 hours ago, America's Angel said:
I've yet to encounter any evidence that procs are a balance problem in PvE or PvP. Feel free to link me to any numbers you have on this. I'm always happy to look at data. I agree with you that nerfing procs is a bad idea. I also agree that adding more procs to increase the diversity of builds is a good idea. (I've actually advocated for exactly this on the testing discord plenty of times.)
With that said, none of these extra procs would stop damage being king in CoH. That's just how the game is, and always will be. And tbh, damage being king is not so much a "problem" with CoH as much as it is a cornerstone. It's pretty much been the status quo ever since the game launched. I remember Synapse mentioning this way back on the old forums back when the game was live. Specifically, that a lot of the non-damage stuff players do is just smoke and mirrors to make the game seem more complex than it actually is. A lot of the issues the OG devs had was trying to find ways to make things like -recharge -end -recovery -accuracy -tohit, and other such debuffs/buffs actually matter vs mobs. They never really did. (Especially post IO set bonuses).
Damage being king is more pronounced in PvE. In PvE the enemies we fight are just bags of HP. So the only things that actually matter are damage, -res (which is just an indirect damage buff), -hp (which is a ghetto attack) and to a lesser extent things like -regen. PvP enemies on the other hand are players. They're more than just bags of HP. Their end matters. Their recharge matters. Their accuracy matters. Half the debuffs that do nothing in PvE actually do stuff in PvP. Hell, healing matters in PvP because enemies do spike damage and defense is mostly useless. What the game desperately needs is enemy encounters where a lot of these forgotten mechanics actually play a role. Enemies that spike individual members of a team, that heal their team-mates the second they start taking damage, that evade, that have higher accuracy than normal mobs so that -tohit matters, that have OP powers on really low recharges so that slows matter, that have higher defense than normal to counter our reliance on set bonuses for accuracy, etc.
More complex enemies is what this game needs in order to create more diverse gameplay. (And luckily for us, that's what Cobalt, Piecemeal, and the other content devs seem to be focusing on right now.) What the game does not need is easy-to-implement-nerfs, justified by anecdotes and forum hysteria, that makes killing +4/8 trash mobs slightly slower, but otherwise no more difficult than before.
So yeah, if you think the problem is "damage is king", the only solution is to make another game. However, if you think we should add more (non-damage) procs then yeah, totally with you.
The entire point of PvP and PvE is to kill bags of HP. Those dynamics don’t change just because one is vs NPC and one is vs PC. -recharge means nothing in PvP if you can’t actually kill your target. That is why damage is king. What I was referring to was that because damage is king we have an over abundance of builds whose only concern is doing more damage. My suggestion wouldn’t necessarily change that BUT it could change the WAY you get there. My suggestion isn't that damage shouldn't be king, but more that because damage is king, that is why people are perceiving damage procs the way that they are. If you had other equally potent alternatives, damage procs would seem less potent in comparison.
-tohit, -regen, -recharge, does matter in PvE. It does affect the outcome of a fight. But because there aren’t really viable/potent proc options for those effects, damage procs are used. My argument isn’t that damage procs wouldn’t be used, it is that if their are viable and equally potent alternatives, maybe they would be used a little less.EDIT: And, to be fair not every effect is treated equally. -recharge doesn't help with Alpha in any way, it just helps in the longer run. If your target is able to two or three shot you, -recharge doesn't matter at all. I learned this lesson a long time ago with a psi/rad corruptor in PvP, 🤣. However, if your target is able to two or three shot you, -tohit could certainly help a lot (especially in PvE).
EDIT: Also, as far as adding more complex enemy groups and gameplay I have said this 1000000000 times. I would love to see this.
Ultimately, I feel like we are making the same point while disagreeing slightly on the details of those points, haha. So at least we have that!
-
Entangling arrow is great.
Also, this is one of the values over primary vs secondary. The ability to skip the T1.
-
2
-
-
10 hours ago, America's Angel said:
Some of them are extremely useful in PvP, and allow for extremely diverse PvP builds, but otherwise useless in PvE because all that matters in PvE is damage.
Glad to see you finally admit there is a problem! 😁
Also, if we are being honest here, endurance drain is very niche in PvP, most builds are loading up on damage. I double checked dozens of PvP builds to confirm this. Damage procs are king there too (with regards to attacks).
The only time I’ve seen Tempest as somewhat useful is if you are doubling down on endurance drain on an elec toon of some kind, most likely a Defender/Corruptor/Controller/Sentinel. Pair it with preemptive interface, and some heavy endurance mod and you have a decent sapper, even in PvE. The problem is that it usually takes a ton of commitment to accomplish and you end up losing out on damage and damage is king. Your team has usually mopped the floor with the enemy before you can sap them. For Tempest to be more useful it’s effects would need to me on par with damage procs in speed, IMO.
I can appreciate your not wanting to mess up PvP, that seems to be one of your favorite way to play the game, and you are fighting valiantly to keep things the way they are with regards to procs. But you have to acknowledge that "damage is king" is the problem. And it is the problem in PvP too, maybe less so than PvE but still it is king. PvP builds are definitely more interesting than PvE builds, I will give you that. But THAT is the problem, PvE doesn't really have the same build diversity as PvP. It has the illusion of build diversity. Outside of a few niche builds that only work on a few powersets, most players build for a couple damage procs or -res procs per attack (depending on the powerset). Why? Because overall that is the ideal way to build your toon to be competitive in both solo and team play. I would like to see more proc options that make the player really think about what they want to do. More -regen, -recharge, -HP, -tohit, etc that can be added to certain attacks. While that wont fix everyone's obsession with clear speed, if you do it right, you can create that true build diversity that everyone here seems to care so much about.
I think we can agree that maybe a flat nerf to damage procs isn't the answer. But right now, say you are a corruptor, if you have the option to add about 40 DPA (with a damage proc) to an attack or a 5% self heal, c'mon. Most people are going to take that 40 DPA. HOWEVER, if you make the decision more like 40 DPA or 15% self heal (just an example not saying it should be 15%) well now that decision is a little more interesting. Or what about 40 DPA vs -50% regen for 15 seconds? May not be as great against minions/leuts/bosses but against AV's and GM's that would be interesting! Especially if it stacked with other powers and you build around it. Those are the kinds of decisions I would like to see players make, instead of 90% of the time: "more damage = more better!"
-
2
-
-
11 minutes ago, Player-1 said:
This right here is why I had asked earlier 😉
On the whole, a goal is definitely to allow for variety with the IO system as that is a very fun part of the game. If there is something that is messing with that goal then it will be on our radar.
Something that has had a little bit of focus here are the "bad" procs. The Tempest: Chance of End Drain one was brought up a few times as something that would go against the goal above as its poor performance in relation to other options effectively takes it away as a choice instead of adding to the variety of fun options. Looking at it this way, do you ever find yourselves as players going after certain procs (damage, etc) more due to other options not being as attractive rather than the ones you choose being good?
Exactly this.
I have said before, what else am I going to reasonably do? Too often loading up damage procs is all that’s left as an option.
-
6 hours ago, Mr Pierce said:
I was talking to some of my SG mates tonight and we all realized that there was a super low hanging fruit that the developers could use to get an easy win with the players: Earth Manipulation for Blasters. It wouldn't require any new FX or animations. All you would need to do is cobble together things from Earth Control and Earth Assault from Doms, then tweak a few of the powers to fit the typical Blaster secondary.
With that said, I thought I'd take a stab at putting a list of powers together and see what everyone thinks. Feel free to give feedback and input. I'll edit as we go to try and make the strongest possible build.
If you look at most Blaster secondaries, you find that they have some semblance of the following mold:
- tier 1: Single Target Immobilize
- tier 2: Melee Attack
- tier 3: Single Target Hold
- tier 4: Melee Attack
- tier 5: Build Up
- tier 6: Recovery Toggle
- tier 7: PBAoE
- tier 8: PBAoE Hold/Stun/Disorient/Sleep
- tier 9: Melee Attack
So taking that into consideration while also looking at the powers available to us from Dominators. I have come up with this design:
- tier 1: Stone Prison
- tier 2: Stone Fist
- tier 3: Fossilize
- tier 4: Stone Mallet
- tier 5: Build Up
- tier 6: Mud Pots (Add +regen and +recovery, remove endurance cost)
- tier 7: Seismic Smash
- tier 8: Salt Crystals (yes, sleep sucks, but it fits, allows for some solo builds, and gives us a skippable power)
- tier 9: Tremor
What do you guys think? Did I miss anything?
I can get down with this!
-
1
-
1 hour ago, America's Angel said:
Already exists:
https://archive.paragonwiki.com/wiki/Set_Enhancements_with_Special_Effects
More up to date version, here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vd4ZZd1jfhOzdZZkGxC9O0NN5G0T1EdWPu_XRrV6s0U/editDoes your asking this mean the dev team doesn't have any hard data that proves procs are overperforming?
You must be a lawyer, IRL. Lol
-
1
-
Genetic Corruption not getting +res
in Bug Reports
Posted · Edited by th0ughtGun
For Stalkers, Genetic Corruption is not getting the +res bonus it says it should get while in Defensive Adaptation.