[Inquiry] Datamine IO usage?

[Galaxy Brain]

We have gotten awesome data on AT's played, Powersets & Combos chosen per AT, and even individual power choices all at various level ranges. Is it possible to gather similar information on what players are slotting?

 

Given how active the community has been when it comes to sharing information and beta testing, I am curious how prolific IO usage actually is. We often see the rhetoric of "The game is balanced around SO's!" tossed around, and that is fine as a baseline as it is the basic enhancement all players find in combat and from stores. That said, the IO system has been part of the game for a proportionately longer time than just SO's, and with all the information available to us I highly doubt that most players have not used the system.

 

What would be interesting to know is:

 

• How many players only use SO's?
• How many players only use Generic IO's?
• Stats on what IO sets are most commonly slotted?
  • Could just be like, "X players have an IO from Y set", etc.
• Stats on what individual IO's are most commonly slotted?
  • Separated by Unique IOs, Procs, ATOs, etc...
• How many players have Fully Kitted Out characters?
  • Defined as having say... >75% of their powers with Set-IOs?

 

 

I think data on IO usage, if possible, would be a valuable point of reference when it comes to all sorts of discussion about the game going forward.

 

Thoughts / suggestions for other data points?

[macskull]

I would be okay with using this sort of data for entertainment purposes, or maybe for investigating underperforming IO sets/set bonuses, but I would absolutely not be okay with using this data to change the way the game plays because that takes the invention system from the realm of "optional but really nice" to "required."

[Doc_Scorpion]

50 minutes ago, macskull said:

I would absolutely not be okay with using this data to change the way the game plays because that takes the invention system from the realm of "optional but really nice" to "required."

Seconded.

[MunkiLord]

1 hour ago, macskull said:

I would be okay with using this sort of data for entertainment purposes, or maybe for investigating underperforming IO sets/set bonuses, but I would absolutely not be okay with using this data to change the way the game plays because that takes the invention system from the realm of "optional but really nice" to "required."

I agree with this. But what would absolutely happen is some people would use the data to call for nerfs to some sets while phrasing it as adjustments or balance. So for that reason alone, I'm not really a fan of the idea even though I would find the data fascinating.

[Galaxy Brain]

Agreed, but my goals are to ideally:

 

1) Show how prominent IO use actually is in order to gauge "Ok yeah, IO balance is probably a factor"

 

and

 

2) Wow, all these IOs are taken over these ones. What can we do to make the lesser ones better?

 

 

 

I'm of the camp that a lot of IO's potential is actually wasted. Procs, Defense and Recharge are all much much better than most other stats you could build for. Being able to chase other stats to comparatively equal value could to a lot to make IO's even more diverse and fun.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Galaxy Brain

[Razor Cure]

Generally the less taken Ios are because they kinda suck. Or have mostly junky bonuses, that while BEING a bonus, aren't really good ones, or it isnt feasible to obtain enough of said bonus to make it worthwhile. Like you said..Procs, Def and rech are just SO much better than any other set bonus as to be in another league altogether. I don't think IO datamining is needed to figure that out. Look at any range def capped blaster vs a non def blaster..the performance is night and day. Both can be fun, do a ton of damage, but the def blaster will die much less.

If they did datamine and boost the less used IOs (which are generally the sub 40 and 30 sets), I doubt many people would suddenly start using them, maybe super rich people doing alt, sub lvl 50 builds and boosting every enhancement.

[Galaxy Brain]

Well, that is an unknown right now. At the very least, looking into how many people:

1. Use IO's at all
2. Use just generics instead of SO's
3. Use sets
4. Use unique / special IO's (like LotG)

Is something that is just speculation. Seeing that would at least be a point of reference when it comes to discussion. If we see many people are using IO's, and that certain sets are left in the dust, maybe it'd be nice to go in and just tweak the bonuses for like... +Damage / etc to be worthwhile route to chase over the super popular sets. 

[golstat2003]

20 hours ago, macskull said:

I would be okay with using this sort of data for entertainment purposes, or maybe for investigating underperforming IO sets/set bonuses, but I would absolutely not be okay with using this data to change the way the game plays because that takes the invention system from the realm of "optional but really nice" to "required."

Pretty much this.

[TheAdjustor]

On 10/9/2019 at 6:38 PM, MunkiLord said:

I agree with this. But what would absolutely happen is some people would use the data to call for nerfs to some sets while phrasing it as adjustments or balance. So for that reason alone, I'm not really a fan of the idea even though I would find the data fascinating.

You can just see the thread calling for nerfing LotG +7.5 being written

[Some Random User]

12 hours ago, TheAdjustor said:

You can just see the thread calling for nerfing LotG +7.5 being written

Maybe instead of nerfing Luck of the Gambler we can add an alternative that you have to build somewhat differently to benefit from.

[TheAdjustor]

59 minutes ago, Some Random User said:

Maybe instead of nerfing Luck of the Gambler we can add an alternative that you have to build somewhat differently to benefit from.

Agreed. Personally I'd like to see powers like quickness, time lord, and agility as pool powers.  It's one thing to make choices in a build it's another to have them forced upon you.

[Galaxy Brain]

1 hour ago, TheAdjustor said:

Agreed. Personally I'd like to see powers like quickness, time lord, and agility as pool powers.  It's one thing to make choices in a build it's another to have them forced upon you.

Thats sorta the main thing, many IO's are just so dang good that they overshadow all other choices.

[TheAdjustor]

3 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Thats sorta the main thing, many IO's are just so dang good that they overshadow all other choices.

I don't think they are that great so much as base recharge is that bad.

[Galaxy Brain]

6 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

I don't think they are that great so much as base recharge is that bad.

Right, but that is a different can of worms (somewhat tied to MMO retention design, but yeah...)

[TheAdjustor]

5 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Right, but that is a different can of worms (somewhat tied to MMO retention design, but yeah...)

Well speaking on that topic, it's a fair bit of obvious that a large percentage of IOs were designed as crap just for that reason.

[Galaxy Brain]

Right, but I think the same effect could be made if more IOs were competitively viable options that made you want to explore and play more.

 

[TheAdjustor]

8 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Right, but I think the same effect could be made if more IOs were competitively viable options that made you want to explore and play more.

 

Well recharge is its own nerf.  After you hit 100% recharge every additional gain is half as effective and when you hit 200% it's down to a 1/3rd. Most builds strive to hit the recharge numbers they need to function. Gapless attack chain, perma dom, perma drain psyche what have you past those points recharge buys you very little extra.

[Galaxy Brain]

But it is still incredibly powerful along with defense, to the point of it always being useful when you compare to practically any other bonus.

 

Anyways, the point of the thread here is to see how many people are even using IO's to start. Until we get that I'm unsure of how big a leg we have to stand on when talking bonuses.

[Clave Dark 5]

6 hours ago, TheAdjustor said:

Well speaking on that topic, it's a fair bit of obvious that a large percentage of IOs were designed as crap just for that reason.

Do I recall correctly that at inception, they thought players would be slowly slotting then later replacing IOs as they leveled?  Like "right now I'm only level 12 so I can slot this mostly lousy four piece armor set, but once I'm 27 I can start slotting a full six piece set of this armor set!" or something?  That alone would ensure a certain percentage of sets are junk.

[Megajoule]

"This game was put t'gether by monkeys."

[Herotu]

On 10/11/2019 at 7:18 PM, Some Random User said:

Maybe instead of nerfing Luck of the Gambler we can add an alternative that you have to build somewhat differently to benefit from.

Can we just get a new set that's just as good, or buff one of the other sets? I mean, Luck of the Gambler is infinitely better than it's second place competitor(s) - IMO it should be either;

1. a dilemma to choose between sets or
2. a choice between being good at one thing OR another

... instead of being so bloody obvious.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Megajoule said:

"This game was put t'gether by monkeys."

I think they did a good job, but some decisions seem... hasty? We don't know the situation they were in when they made them, but I suppose a peculiar environment could cause monkeybrain.

Edited October 13, 2019 by Herotu

[Megajoule]

10 minutes ago, Herotu said:

Can we just get a new set that's just as good, or buff one of the other sets? I mean, Luck of the Gambler is infinitely better than it's second place competitor(s) - IMO it should be either a dilemma to choose between them or a choice between being good at one thing OR another, instead of being so bloody obvious.

Used to be the difference was cost and availability.  There were several occasions where I "settled" - e.g., Red Fortune instead of LotG - for lack of inf, time, and straight-up ability to get the top performing set(s).  HC is a very different environment than Live in those terms.

 

And I was half-joking there; the Paragon crew brought us a fun game, but they often didn't fully understand the innards of it themselves, or some of the consequences of decisions made under great time and budget pressure.

[Clave Dark 5]

Just now, Megajoule said:

Used to be the difference was cost and availability.

Solid point there, I'd forgotten that aspect of the old days.

[Haijinx]

Welcome to COH issue 9 Beta.  Please keep your hands and feet inside the Tram at all times.  

 

 

 

Edited October 13, 2019 by Haijinx

[Herotu]

On 10/9/2019 at 10:30 PM, macskull said:

I would be okay with using this sort of data for entertainment purposes, or maybe for investigating underperforming IO sets/set bonuses, but I would absolutely not be okay with using this data to change the way the game plays because that takes the invention system from the realm of "optional but really nice" to "required."

Eh.,.. what? It's PvE... who cares how other people make their builds?  It's not like those stupid shitty raids that other games focus on.

 

19 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Welcome to COH issue 9 Beta.  Please keep your hands and feet inside the Tram at all times.  

 

 

 

What page?

Edited October 13, 2019 by Herotu