Why no villains?

[RedwoodElf]

I started with City of Villains, and I ended (at shuttering of old CoH) with a Villain.

 

Pure Villains (Or Rogues) exist! We are small, but we are mighty!

 

I recreated my old FF/Bot Mastermind (I had to call him "Botmaster" instead of "Botman" because someone snatched his original name on Exelsior) so Villains are a thing!

 

Botmaster: They laughed when I said I would power an army of robots with tapioca pudding! But I'll Show them! I'll show them ALL! BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!

[Dr. Gemini]

Given the low population of villains, maybe the GMs could designate an Unofficial Villain Server. At least that could channel villain players to the same place so you might start having enough for more teams.

I've suggested this too, and I still think it could work.

 

As before, I nominate Indomitable, because it's also the unofficial PvP server, and the two designations would naturally help each other grow; more villains mean more opponents for heroes in PvP zones, more PvP opponents for heroes mean more villains.

 

What! Share my server with a bunch of stinking villains!!?? Never!

 

Although if you all would shower regularly it would be fine.

 

Actually, I didn't even realize Indomitable was the unofficial PvP server. That could put a crimp in my PvP zone badge hunting.

[KittyEmpress]

Before Going Rogue, Villains were always considered weaker than their equivalent hero archetype for a few reasons. Brutes werent as tanky as tankers, paired with us having weaker support archetypes, meaning that we were better with damage, but had none of the survivability of heroes.

 

Post going rogue, those few who did play villains were quick to switch over to hero side because the synergy was better. A brute + defender combo can have a duo that is as tanky as a tanker, with better damage than a scrapper

 

And because villain side was always less populated than hero side, the devs always gave more attention and new stuff to hero side (thus them having twice as much content). Which contributed even further to population decline.

[Prototelis]

Before Going Rogue, Villains were always considered weaker than their equivalent hero archetype

That isn't totally true, especially not when comparing brutes and tanks.

 

I believe the real reason red is less popular is because it doesn't have as much content. It was also functionally its own game before the two sides were married.

 

[Miss Midnight]

I personally play both sides, but like most people I used to play with, did not like the zones as much as hero side

 

[Chuckers]

I started with CoH, but when Villains came out, I really fell for the writing. I love the stories and the characters. Before you could make Villain AT's on the blue side, I played more villains and I still feel that Villain AT's belong red side :)

 

With Homecoming 7 out of 10 of my characters are Villains.

[Primantis]

Before Going Rogue, Villains were always considered weaker than their equivalent hero archetype

That isn't totally true, especially not when comparing brutes and tanks.

 

I believe the real reason red is less popular is because it doesn't have as much content. It was also functionally its own game before the two sides were married.

 

While this might have been the case for Doms and Stalkers, it certainly was not the case for Brutes. Corruptors were thought to be pretty much on-par with Defenders.

 

Heck I remember Hero tanks doomsaying about Brutes going over to the blueside. "If Brutes ever came over to Heroes no one would play/invite Tankers". There was a real Brutephobia going around xD

 

 

Aside form that. I think Hero is more popular due to one simple fact. Hero is more populated. Many people love being on the "most popular" side which leads into a never ending spiral of them becoming more and more popular. Much like how the most populous servers tend to get most of the new population as well.

 

Also Villain content, while varied and interesting, pitted you against some annoying mobs a lot. Praetoria was even worse in that regard. If there's one thing I've learned about the masses in this game, it's that they want to roflstomp Council and Freaks. Not pull their hair out fighting Longbow etc xD

 

 

As a side note. "The Bad guys" are almost aways less popular in MMOs. The Horde in WoW was generally outnumbered by at least 2 to 1. Same with Chaos in Warhammer:AoR.

 

 

[Prototart]

Historically, villains were almost never more than around 20% of the player population.

 

So they didn't get a ton of extra content - not enough people played them, so they couldn't justify time and money going to villain-exclusive content.

 

Which disinclined people from playing villains.

 

Which meant they got less content.

 

Which, etc.

 

It's unfortunate. Villain content tends to be much better-written, but a lot of that is because villains miss all the bad 'KILL X Ys!' stuff and the dozens of contacts who lack arcs and, etc. More recent (relatively speaking) hero content is largely on-par with villain stuff.

 

Population disparity has been an issue with all MMOs offering multiple sides. Most people want to be the Pretty Side, most people want to be the Good Guys.

[davpa]

Sorry if it's been answered, but I looked. Why are there so many heroes vs. so few villains?

Quality over quantity, my friend.

[renegade0]

I started with Villains, but honestly...I just like the Hero side maps a lot better. The dark and depressing villain side maps just dont do it for me.

[desarix]

The mistake was letting heroes play the Villain AT. Look the most popular ATs. Brute and Mastermind and they were villain ATs. They should have kept the separation and a villain can become a hero but had to change their AT. Then you will see a good villain population. Unfortunately they just made a soup of everything, no distinction of being a villain really.

[Prototart]

The mistake was letting heroes play the Villain AT. Look the most popular ATs. Brute and Mastermind and they were villain ATs. They should have kept the separation and a villain can become a hero but had to change their AT. Then you will see a good villain population. Unfortunately they just made a soup of everything, no distinction of being a villain really.

 

Yeah, /signed for that. They should've left them like epic archtypes, you can BECOME a hero/villain but you can't START as one. There aren't many non-hardline vigilante examples of VATs and there's - honestly, I can think of /one/ Hero Mastermind and it's from an Alan Moore comic and she's a cop in a city of superheroes, not a superhero herself.

[Zumberge]

Blueside has more content and it's easier to get in the mindset of a hero than a villain (generally speaking).  Which is not to say that redside is without merit; the zones were designed based on what the devs learned since CoH's launch and as such they're a bit more tightly focused and the writing seems, if not better, then at least more interesting.  It's like the saying that heroes are reactive while villains are proactive.  You're going out there doing things, and there's more depth and intrigue going on because everyone has an agenda and hidden motivations.

 

On a more personal note, it does pain me a little to see so few people (relatively) redside and at the very least I try to even the scales a little, but my villains tend to be joke characters or just not serious because all the serious ones wouldn't really mesh with the setting or everyone else's characters as a whole.  In that sense it's a bit limiting, or limited.

[_NOPE_]

The mistake was letting heroes play the Villain AT. Look the most popular ATs. Brute and Mastermind and they were villain ATs. They should have kept the separation and a villain can become a hero but had to change their AT. Then you will see a good villain population. Unfortunately they just made a soup of everything, no distinction of being a villain really.

 

Yeah, /signed for that. They should've left them like epic archtypes, you can BECOME a hero/villain but you can't START as one. There aren't many non-hardline vigilante examples of VATs and there's - honestly, I can think of /one/ Hero Mastermind and it's from an Alan Moore comic and she's a cop in a city of superheroes, not a superhero herself.

 

Qft, I had a tough time explaining to my six-year-old son how that red lady with the demon horn summoning little tiny fire demons was actually a good guy.

[jubakumbi]

Yeah, /signed for that. They should've left them like epic archtypes, you can BECOME a hero/villain but you can't START as one. There aren't many non-hardline vigilante examples of VATs and there's - honestly, I can think of /one/ Hero Mastermind and it's from an Alan Moore comic and she's a cop in a city of superheroes, not a superhero herself.

 

/unsigned.

 

Restrictions just because you cannot think of a good one?

I just do not understand people that want to put restictions on the creatvity of others.

 

Why even look at these classes as Villiand or Hero - they are just classes.

 

The _original_ design did not even have classes, you could just 'pick two'!

Never made it out of development because 'balance'.

Are Thor and Hawkeye 'balanced' - I think not.

 

Why do some people want to put everything in it's own little box?

I just don't get it.

 

I am not even trying to be snarky here, I just do not understand why poeple playing games like restictions to creativity.

 

And it seems like poeple are 'just sad' because some class or another is not popular?

Are we looking for things to grouse about now?

 

:)

[Blastit]

Qft, I had a tough time explaining to my six-year-old son how that red lady with the demon horn summoning little tiny fire demons was actually a good guy.

 

Eh, you've always been able to make demon characters. There have always been dark-based powers (including stealing the life from people) and Mind Control, which is solidly not a good-guy thing to do. Masterminds can cover anything from the prodigal inventor to antiheroes so they don't really change that much. You could perhaps come up with a more neutral name. Dominators, Corruptors and Stalkers are even worse off in that department!

 

I am not even trying to be snarky here, I just do not understand why poeple playing games like restictions to creativity.

 

Because having to work around restrictions can foster its own kind of creativity, and restrictions can be necessary to create a structure to your game and offer different gaming experiences. The idea behind having villain-original ATs only starting as actual villains is to give that side of the game its own style and to provide solid reasons for going red. The different sides having different group dynamics could be valuable from a game design point of view and from a variety point of view.

[Dr. Gemini]

Because having to work around restrictions can foster its own kind of creativity, and restrictions can be necessary to create a structure to your game and offer different gaming experiences. The idea behind having villain-original ATs only starting as actual villains is to give that side of the game its own style and to provide solid reasons for going red. The different sides having different group dynamics could be valuable from a game design point of view and from a variety point of view.

 

...and for years you could only play villain ATs redside, and the redside population was still just as low as it was after that restriction was lifted. I highly doubt a significant number of people would have started redside just to get a villain AT to blueside. Further, what good would that even do? So, more grouping for low level content, and still vast emptiness for anything past the point that a character can migrate. I just can't see any benefit to those restrictions.

[jubakumbi]

Because having to work around restrictions can foster its own kind of creativity, and restrictions can be necessary to create a structure to your game and offer different gaming experiences. The idea behind having villain-original ATs only starting as actual villains is to give that side of the game its own style and to provide solid reasons for going red. The different sides having different group dynamics could be valuable from a game design point of view and from a variety point of view.

 

...and for years you could only play villain ATs redside, and the redside population was still just as low as it was after that restriction was lifted. I highly doubt a significant number of people would have started redside just to get a villain AT to blueside. Further, what good would that even do? So, more grouping for low level content, and still vast emptiness for anything past the point that a character can migrate. I just can't see any benefit to those restrictions.

 

The old 'more restictions makes me think harder bit' is just that, old.

More restictions just makes everyone fall into some vision of 'how to have fun' based on rules in code.

If you want the rules and restrictions to make you more creative, then apply them to _your_ creations.

Restricting _everyone_ is just a form of control to dictate the narrative.

 

Personally, I am waiting for someone to mod the system such that _all_ the zones and content are _always_ accessible to _all_ characters.

This way, we have a big sandbox to do what we like.

 

A ham-fisted attempt at resticting players in an effort to get them to 'confrom and play properly' is silly, IMO.

 

I will not be placed in a box and I will try to break any boxes others are using to control the narrative and stiffle creativity.

 

If you want more people to play the villian content, forcing class or other restrictions is not going to do it.

At best, from posts here it would be a win for some, you would just see a few less ATs in Altlas, they would have to switch over later.

If the immersion realy menas that much to you, run your own server.

[Dr. Gemini]

The old 'more restictions makes me think harder bit' is just that, old.

More restictions just makes everyone fall into some vision of 'how to have fun' based on rules in code.

If you want the rules and restrictions to make you more creative, then apply them to _your_ creations.

Restricting _everyone_ is just a form of control to dictate the narrative.

 

Personally, I am waiting for someone to mod the system such that _all_ the zones and content are _always_ accessible to _all_ characters.

This way, we have a big sandbox to do what we like.

 

A ham-fisted attempt at resticting players in an effort to get them to 'confrom and play properly' is silly, IMO.

 

I will not be placed in a box and I will try to break any boxes others are using to control the narrative and stiffle creativity.

 

If you want more people to play the villian content, forcing class or other restrictions is not going to do it.

At best, from posts here it would be a win for some, you would just see a few less ATs in Altlas, they would have to switch over later.

If the immersion realy menas that much to you, run your own server.

 

It boils down to this, IMO. If you have to use unique access to something desirable as the only means of getting people to play specific content, then its the content that needs to be fixed. If it was enjoyable to most it would not need to use restrictions to gain players.

[jubakumbi]

It boils down to this, IMO. If you have to use unique access to something desirable as the only means of getting people to play specific content, then its the content that needs to be fixed. If it was enjoyable to most it would not need to use restrictions to gain players.

 

Ding Ding Ding!

We have a winner!

[Adeon Hawkwood]

Qft, I had a tough time explaining to my six-year-old son how that red lady with the demon horn summoning little tiny fire demons was actually a good guy.

Sounds like a good time to teach your son why it's important to not judge people based on their appearances.

[_NOPE_]

That's actually exactly what I did.

[Skyhawke]

COV was and now will be again where I go for catharsis. Most times will find me blue side, but a bad day?  Oh you bet I’m gonna go red side.

[markofantares]

All this boils down to one fact: People will always prefer to play the Hero.  Villain-lovers have always been a niche population.

[Schreg]

I fully intend to play on both sides, well more occasionally on the Villain side, to fully explore the content.  I don't remember any of the missions on red side being exceptionally reflective of really evil stuff anyway, and it's fun to explore totally new zones and missions.  I just am not prioritizing it as I started where I started fifteen years ago, on the Blue side, because that's all there was.