Feedback: Testing Melee Set Performance

[Infinitum]

21 minutes ago, Hopeling said:

Neither you nor I were there, so I'm not sure how you can know there were no issues nor complaints. Power creep and TW being overpowered were recurring topics of discussion before shutdown, and still are now.

 

As far as I can tell, essentially no balance adjustments of any kind occurred between shutdown and Homecoming. But that doesn't mean the current dev team is uninterested in balance; for example, the most recent patch significantly adjusted Devices as well as most Dominator secondaries. Nor are nerfs off the table; Envenomed Blades was brought down significantly. Nor did /Martial Dominators revolt: the primary reaction seems to be "oh well, it's still fun".

 

Why wasn't TW nerfed? Well, based on GM posts in this thread, it's because nobody had time to look into it. That's why he said they'd take a look at the data if we can collect it.

Yeah I can see that, I think - again - homecoming has a good feel for things.

 

I'm just trying to illustrate how this appears to be a whole lot of busy body work for something that really isn't broken.  I can't say there is much that feels or appears broken in the game aside from sets like EM that need some love.

 

I really dont get why TW isnthe target here, I have played it, its not for me, and thats after I fixed my build last night the way y'all said to because curiosity got the better of me, its still not for me, I dont get the foaming at the mouth to fix it.

 

My biggest concern is that it could affect more than one melee set needlessly.

 

Sentinels and blasters soloing the itf or LGTF or just about any tf seems way more broken than this, but again in the grand scheme of things not really because it is a super hero game.  I dont really have a problem with any of that.

 

Anyway we've already beat this path to death, valid tests should yield valid numbers.  Anything other than pylon tests.

 

Question though, what if you have 4 or 5 melee sets at the top and 4 or 5 at the bottom with not much in the middle?  Will you propose bringing the top down or bringing the bottom up?  My cincern is you will say bring the top sets down, and I dont think that is the correct course of action.  Or the right thing to do.

[Hopeling]

27 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Sentinels and blasters soloing the itf or LGTF or just about any tf seems way more broken than this,

Way more broken than what? Scrappers and Brutes were soloing the ITF long before we even had Incarnate powers. A blaster doing it is only noteworthy because it's a blaster, not because it's impressive in absolute terms. For melee, that's baseline performance. Moreover, that has been baseline performance for most of the game's history. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Scrapper players like myself and @MunkiLord were soloing AVs and TFs during precisely the same time period when you've claimed it was impossible, using powersets that haven't gotten any better since then. This idea that melee have only recently become able to do these things is simply not based in fact.

27 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Question though, what if you have 4 or 5 melee sets at the top and 4 or 5 at the bottom with not much in the middle?  Will you propose bringing the top down or bringing the bottom up?

 

Bring the bottom up, as I've said before.

Edited September 16, 2019 by Hopeling

[Infinitum]

9 minutes ago, Hopeling said:

Way more broken than what? Scrappers and Brutes were soloing the ITF long before we even had Incarnate powers. A blaster doing it is only noteworthy because it's a blaster, not because it's impressive in absolute terms. For melee, that's baseline performance. Moreover, that has been baseline performance for most of the game's history. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Scrapper players like myself and @MunkiLord were soloing AVs and TFs during precisely the same time period when you've claimed it was impossible, using powersets that haven't gotten any better since then. This idea that melee have only recently become able to do these things is simply not based in fact.

Bring the bottom up, as I've said before.

I thought the ITF and most TFs used to require a minimum team to even start it though, wasn't the ITF 6?

 

Back then I remember all scrapper STF and stuff like that, but never soloing a TF I thought that started with homecoming.

[Hopeling]

Yes, but people did it anyway: you needed 6 to start (or whatever other number for various TFs), but that just means bugging a few people to sit in zone with you for 60 seconds, then they could leave the TF once it's underway.

[Steampunkette]

I never tried to solo a TF, before... But I can vouch for Hopeling.

 

Back in the day, my husband and I would grab one or two friends and then run the 6 person plus TFs. We'd just ask a couple SGmates or randos to join the team long enough for us to start it, then they'd bail and we'd run it, start to finish.

 

I know people who DID solo several task forces back then. Particularly the ITF. Biiiiig bragging rights for the 30 seconds it took for people to read you bragging about it, type in 'Gratz', and forget that it was a thing.

Edited September 16, 2019 by Steampunkette

[Indystruck]

6 hours ago, Infinitum said:

Have you ever played it?

 

Yes, I have a Psi Melee stalker at 50+3.

 

And, naturally, I am pretty sure I could solo the ITF on it, but it'd probably put up a time of 45 min - 1 hr versus my time of 20ish minutes on my TW/Rad scrapper.

Edited September 16, 2019 by Indystruck

[Infinitum]

21 minutes ago, Steampunkette said:

I never tried to solo a TF, before... But I can vouch for Hopeling.

 

Back in the day, my husband and I would grab one or two friends and then run the 6 person plus TFs. We'd just ask a couple SGmates or randos to join the team long enough for us to start it, then they'd bail and we'd run it, start to finish.

 

I know people who DID solo several task forces back then. Particularly the ITF. Biiiiig bragging rights for the 30 seconds it took for people to read you bragging about it, type in 'Gratz', and forget that it was a thing.

lol that is pretty cool though.

 

Guess I just missed all that.

 

What did they do to overcome the AV regen?  Was it straight up dps or trickeration?

Edited September 16, 2019 by Infinitum

[Infinitum]

18 minutes ago, Indystruck said:

 

Yes, I have a Psi Melee stalker at 50+3.

 

And, naturally, I am pretty sure I could solo the ITF on it, but it'd probably put up a time of 45 min - 1 hr versus my time of 20ish minutes on my TW/Rad scrapper.

The rad has an attack and built in debuffs though, what is the secondary for the stalker?

[Hopeling]

10 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

What did they do to overcome the AV regen?

Straight DPS. AV regen is only about 100 hp/sec, which many strong builds can beat.

[Infinitum]

1 minute ago, Hopeling said:

Straight DPS. AV regen is only about 100 hp/sec, which many strong builds can beat.

It's only 100 HP per second?  You sure about that?  That doesn seem right from what you face in game with a team.  Seems to take longer to overcome than what 100 hp per second is.

[Indystruck]

30 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

The rad has an attack and built in debuffs though, what is the secondary for the stalker?

 

Bio Armor. So -regen/HP recovery and some other debuffage mixed in with good mitigaton. Psi Melee is fun, but it is not anywhere close to being a DPS frontrunner.

[MunkiLord]

1 hour ago, Hopeling said:

Way more broken than what? Scrappers and Brutes were soloing the ITF long before we even had Incarnate powers. A blaster doing it is only noteworthy because it's a blaster, not because it's impressive in absolute terms. For melee, that's baseline performance. Moreover, that has been baseline performance for most of the game's history. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Scrapper players like myself and @MunkiLord were soloing AVs and TFs during precisely the same time period when you've claimed it was impossible, using powersets that haven't gotten any better since then. This idea that melee have only recently become able to do these things is simply not based in fact.

Bring the bottom up, as I've said before.

I can vouch for this too. BillZ once soloed the entire Freedom Phalanx Task Forces in one day under Scrapper challenge rules, so no temps, inspirations, or deaths. He was Claws/Something.

 

Right after Interface came out I was able to do the ITF solo on my Spines/Fire Scrapper, but I died like five times at the last battle. I think Interface was bugged to be too good at that time, otherwise I don't think Spines had the ST damage to do it. But I'm not positive on that last part.

 

I have an ultimate goal of doing a solo Ms Libterty Task Force on a Blaster, but I'm in no hurry because I feel the only thing I'll really accomplish is getting every single debt badge in one sitting.

[Hopeling]

21 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

It's only 100 HP per second?  You sure about that?  That doesn seem right from what you face in game with a team.  Seems to take longer to overcome than what 100 hp per second is.

 

Depending on the AV's level and resists, beating that regeneration can be harder sometimes. They also just have a lot of HP: if you have 200 DPS, that's about 100 after you take off the regeneration, so it's going to take 28271/100=283 seconds to kill her, or almost five minutes.

Edited September 16, 2019 by Hopeling

[Infinitum]

3 minutes ago, Hopeling said:

 

Depending on the AV's level and resists, beating that regeneration can be harder sometimes. They also just have a lot of HP: if you have 200 DPS, that's about 100 after you take off the regeneration, so it's going to take 28271/100=283 seconds to kill her, or almost five minutes.

Yeah once resistance is factored it id imagine it would be a bit harder

 

5 minutes ago, MunkiLord said:

I can vouch for this too. BillZ once soloed the entire Freedom Phalanx Task Forces in one day under Scrapper challenge rules, so no temps, inspirations, or deaths. He was Claws/Something.

 

Right after Interface came out I was able to do the ITF solo on my Spines/Fire Scrapper, but I died like five times at the last battle. I think Interface was bugged to be too good at that time, otherwise I don't think Spines had the ST damage to do it. But I'm not positive on that last part.

 

I have an ultimate goal of doing a solo Ms Libterty Task Force on a Blaster, but I'm in no hurry because I feel the only thing I'll really accomplish is getting every single debt badge in one sitting.

That's dedication. lol. I don't have the patience for things that seem like they are sitting still.  That's kinda why I prefer all the new shiney powers and incarnate abilities.

[Captain Powerhouse]

2 hours ago, Infinitum said:

Question though, what if you have 4 or 5 melee sets at the top and 4 or 5 at the bottom with not much in the middle?  Will you propose bringing the top down or bringing the bottom up?  My cincern is you will say bring the top sets down, and I dont think that is the correct course of action.  Or the right thing to do.

Since you ask this, I ask you: what would you do if you have absolutely every set but one perform single percentile digits around the median, but a single set perform 33% above the median?

Edited September 16, 2019 by Captain Powerhouse

[TheAdjustor]

13 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

Since you ask this, I ask you: what would you do if you have absolutely every set but one perform single percentile digits around the median, but a single set perform 33% above the median?

I can't speak for infinitum but I have to ask this: Against what set of melee powersets ?

There are sets that you can face roll on your keyboard and get their maximum damage, and then there are sets with mechanics that need to be leveraged to achieve their top performance.   While the guy who is face rolling may resent the fact that people who are putting in more effort do better, that's hardly valid.

Edited September 16, 2019 by TheAdjustor
incorrect use of their

[Infinitum]

1 minute ago, TheAdjustor said:

I can't speak for infinitum but I have to ask this: Against what set of melee powersets ?

There are sets that you can face roll on your keyboard and get their maximum damage, and then their are sets with mechanics that need to be leveraged to achieve their top performance.   While the guy who is face rolling may resent the fact that people who are putting in more effort do better, that's hardly valid.

Yeah I was typing the same thing Adjuster just beat me to it.

 

The tests that yield the results would have to also have to play to various strengths and weaknesses you face in game, ie especially not pylon tests.

[MunkiLord]

16 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

Since you ask this, I ask you: what would you do if you have absolutely every set but one perform single percentile digits around the median, but a single set perform 33% above the median?

That depends, is the 33% above median the typical performance of the set or the extreme? I get why both scenarios could be a problem, but I am curious to how much of an outlier that one set is.

[Galaxy Brain]

Have you guys already run metrics on the sets average performances somehow?

[Steampunkette]

How y'all dodge the question is SO IMPRESSIVE! 

 

They turn it from a simple math question to a hilariously blatant "Well maybe it's about -skill-! Did you think of that?!" turnaround to present the question as shallow or uninformed when it's coming from the current 'Lead Dev' for Power Design and Balance.

 

So here's the question reframed: 

 

If all the powersets, save one, performed right about the same level, only separated by a couple percentage points up or down from 100%, but one remained around 30-45% more effective, regardless of skill, situation, slotting, or other incidental factors: What would you do about the single overperforming set?

[Captain Powerhouse]

22 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Yeah I was typing the same thing Adjuster just beat me to it.

 

The tests that yield the results would have to also have to play to various strengths and weaknesses you face in game, ie especially not pylon tests.

This is not a specific question to any given scenario, just a counter question to the previous statement. If in average, across many metrics, you find that a set outperforms every other set by a significant margin, but all the other sets have single digit discrepancies, what do you feel is the correct course of action? You presented an example where half the set are above and half the sets are below, but what a case where there is just one drastic outlier?

 

Would you pursue changing every single set to match the one single outlier? Would you tone down the one outlier? Would you introduce new content all over the game to counter that one particular set's tricks, hopefully not disrupting any other set? Would you turn a blind eye?

[TheAdjustor]

4 minutes ago, Steampunkette said:

How y'all dodge the question is SO IMPRESSIVE! 

 

They turn it from a simple math question to a hilariously blatant "Well maybe it's about -skill-! Did you think of that?!" turnaround to present the question as shallow or uninformed when it's coming from the current 'Lead Dev' for Power Design and Balance.

 

So here's the question reframed: 

 

If all the powersets, save one, performed right about the same level, only separated by a couple percentage points up or down from 100%, but one remained around 30-45% more effective, regardless of skill, situation, slotting, or other incidental factors: What would you do about the single overperforming set?

I am sorry but considering all the factors isn't dodging the question.  Narrowing down a question until there is just one possible answer isn't actually asking a question it's manipulation.

[MunkiLord]

1 minute ago, Steampunkette said:

How y'all dodge the question is SO IMPRESSIVE! 

 

They turn it from a simple math question to a hilariously blatant "Well maybe it's about -skill-! Did you think of that?!" turnaround to present the question as shallow or uninformed when it's coming from the current 'Lead Dev' for Power Design and Balance.

 

So here's the question reframed: 

 

If all the powersets, save one, performed right about the same level, only separated by a couple percentage points up or down from 100%, but one remained around 30-45% more effective, regardless of skill, situation, slotting, or other incidental factors: What would you do about the single overperforming set?

I actually don't care either way how TW gets resolved, at this point I'm just looking for more information because I find it interesting. I've been watching how changes are being made and Captain Powerhouse has good judgement in my opinion. I don't trust players calling for nerfs because they haven't proven anything. Our experience with AO has given you credibility with me as well, which is why I haven't challenged you directly.

 

If Rage on Scrappers will be as over the top as TW is currently, then this interests me a bit more as it could give some insight to potential changes.

[Hopeling]

7 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

This is not a specific question to any given scenario, just a counter question to the previous statement. If in average, across many metrics, you find that a set outperforms every other set by a significant margin, but all the other sets have single digit discrepancies, what do you feel is the correct course of action? You presented an example where half the set are above and half the sets are below, but what a case where there is just one drastic outlier?

 

Would you pursue changing every single set to match the one single outlier? Would you tone down the one outlier? Would you introduce new content all over the game to counter that one particular set's tricks, hopefully not disrupting any other set? Would you turn a blind eye?

I know you didn't actually ask me, but I'm gonna answer anyway.

 

I don't think the answer is automatically that you bring down the one overperforming set. It's possible that set is the only one that's where you want it to be, or that the target is somewhere in between. This is what happened to Blaster secondaries in i24: /Mental had Drain Psyche, and all other secondaries gained a Sustain effect to give them a comparable amount of +regen and +recovery. That really was buffing all other sets to match the best one.

 

But this was done because the devs thought that Blasters as a whole were underperforming. I don't think that applies to melee as a whole. So assuming that War Mace, Fiery Melee, Street Justice, etc are in a good place in absolute terms - which I think they are - yeah, you bring down the outlier to around that level.

[Infinitum]

11 minutes ago, MunkiLord said:

I actually don't care either way how TW gets resolved, at this point I'm just looking for more information because I find it interesting. I've been watching how changes are being made and Captain Powerhouse has good judgement in my opinion. I don't trust players calling for nerfs because they haven't proven anything. Our experience with AO has given you credibility with me as well, which is why I haven't challenged you directly.

 

If Rage on Scrappers will be as over the top as TW is currently, then this interests me a bit more as it could give some insight to potential changes.

Yeah i trust homecoming too, and will go with whatever they decide.  

 

 

They brought back something I loved so its a small price to pay if this doesn't go the way I want ot think it should.