Consolidated CoH difficulty thread (Includes Poll!)

[Lines]

4 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Ive played Every single day since may aside from a week for summer vacay, and never does it come up for any of the many people ive come across or played with have complained they werent having fun because the game is too easy.

 

A large percentage are Still on playing every night.

 

In fact the ease of content and being able to choose how we play and how fast we play is a huge sticking point for why we love playing this game.

 

Im not saying everyone is happy, but id wager the majority is.  What makes that position any less valid to warrant changing the game for a more vocal minority just to suit some grind fantasy?

Nothing. I'm not in the corner of radical changes to the existing game, even less so from reading this thread. But there are underplayed, outdated or even obsolete parts of the game that could have a lot more value.

 

Grind ≠ difficulty

Grind ≠ challenge

 

I've seen very few people, if any, back the corner of more grinding. I think that's a very narrow idea of what is meant by challenges.

[Infinitum]

8 minutes ago, Lines said:

Nothing. I'm not in the corner of radical changes to the existing game, even less so from reading this thread. But there are underplayed, outdated or even obsolete parts of the game that could have a lot more value.

 

Grind ≠ difficulty

Grind ≠ challenge

 

I've seen very few people, if any, back the corner of more grinding. I think that's a very narrow idea of what is meant by challenges.

I agree with that stance also, but if it never happened, I would still enjoy the game.

[Chris24601]

So I’ve been baking my noodle on this some more and I think there are two relatively easy and non-controversial things that could be done in addressing difficulty.

 

First, add new content that is more difficult. This could also involve revamping some older, but rarely played, content a la the Posi1/2 and Yin TFs (with the older version remaining available on Oroboros). I’ll further make no secret that the already more difficult Shadow Shard would be a good place to start. 

 

Second, adjust XP/inf/merit reward rates to reflect the actual difficulty instead of just their level (or average runtime in the case of merits). A level 54 Carnie Master Illusionist who phases, targets the psi hole, mezzes and spawns pets should be worth more XP/inf than a level 54 Council Archon with a rocket launcher and a kick attack.

 

How much more would require some testing, but given that some of the tougher content literally takes WTF/SF level rewards to see it run at all, I’d say double is NOT unreasonable.

[Galaxy Brain]

2 hours ago, Infinitum said:

Ive played Every single day since may aside from a week for summer vacay, and never does it come up for any of the many people ive come across or played with have complained they werent having fun because the game is too easy.

 

A large percentage are Still on playing every night.

 

In fact the ease of content and being able to choose how we play and how fast we play is a huge sticking point for why we love playing this game.

 

Im not saying everyone is happy, but id wager the majority is.  What makes that position any less valid to warrant changing the game for a more vocal minority just to suit some grind fantasy?

 

Id say the majority is happy that the game is even back, but that is a given. Nobody playing CoH in 2020 is pissed that CoH is back and they can play it lol.

 

Being able to choose the content is great! But, I think a decent portion of us are also feeling a bit worn out that all people want to do is run council missions or AE farms, DFB, etc. Hell, even just running story arcs isn't done in favor of just doing Radios, and of those usually the get a glowie or defeat the boss radios specifically. Being able to pick and choose content is great but there is no risk vs reward most of the time, which leads to the easiest content being the go-to.

 

Some people want to play the game just to play the game, which is great. All the power to them if they just wanna hop on and smoosh council forever. Some people also wanna run the Night Ward missions for the experience of the later content that has new mechanics and stories but have trouble finding anybody who wants to do that with them when they could just run radios for the same experience. Some people want to deck out their characters and throw them at something meaningful to really test themselves too instead of using their fully decked out incarnate to solo a team's radio mission. The beauty of CoH is that you really get to play how you want to, but there seems to be a downside to that where it sort of pays to take the easy route in terms of rewards / effort. As Chris says above, a Carnie boss is the exact same as a council boss when it comes to the rewards to take them down, so the incentive is to just mow down council since they are less hassle. 

 

From my point of view, that is what is harming people's choices when at large some of the more interesting encounters in the game are actively avoided because there are far easier alternatives to throw your OP characters at. When a majority of teams opt for that, then new players and vets alike can often miss out on trying cool content they otherwise could be playing because its not as effecient or face-rolly.

[Infinitum]

25 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

 

Id say the majority is happy that the game is even back, but that is a given. Nobody playing CoH in 2020 is pissed that CoH is back and they can play it lol.

 

Being able to choose the content is great! But, I think a decent portion of us are also feeling a bit worn out that all people want to do is run council missions or AE farms, DFB, etc. Hell, even just running story arcs isn't done in favor of just doing Radios, and of those usually the get a glowie or defeat the boss radios specifically. Being able to pick and choose content is great but there is no risk vs reward most of the time, which leads to the easiest content being the go-to.

 

Some people want to play the game just to play the game, which is great. All the power to them if they just wanna hop on and smoosh council forever. Some people also wanna run the Night Ward missions for the experience of the later content that has new mechanics and stories but have trouble finding anybody who wants to do that with them when they could just run radios for the same experience. Some people want to deck out their characters and throw them at something meaningful to really test themselves too instead of using their fully decked out incarnate to solo a team's radio mission. The beauty of CoH is that you really get to play how you want to, but there seems to be a downside to that where it sort of pays to take the easy route in terms of rewards / effort. As Chris says above, a Carnie boss is the exact same as a council boss when it comes to the rewards to take them down, so the incentive is to just mow down council since they are less hassle. 

 

From my point of view, that is what is harming people's choices when at large some of the more interesting encounters in the game are actively avoided because there are far easier alternatives to throw your OP characters at. When a majority of teams opt for that, then new players and vets alike can often miss out on trying cool content they otherwise could be playing because its not as effecient or face-rolly.

I havent played a radio mission since June.

 

And I can count on one hand how many of my teams have had less than 8 outside of the summer blockbuster.

 

Shoot You want epic, look me and my group up, we deliver that every night usually running non stop weekly task forces.  

 

Seriously I cant remember the last time ive ran a radio mission.

 

And I definately dont council stomp, but honestly I'm usually the tip of the spear so makes no difference what we are facing.   The only thing I avoid is that one unai mission that has the geeked out family kinetics, not because they can take me out but because it.   Takes.   Soooo.  Long.   To.    Kill.    Them.

 

I'm coalitioned with a lot of people while a small fraction of the server population I'm sure, we just dont run easy crap for the sake of rewards.  We are epic thrill seekers through and through.  The more dangerous and crazy we can run it the better.

 

There for a while I refused to take it down from +4/8 but in the interest of time ive since dropped to +2 and sometimes for speed TF I drop it all the way down, really just depends on what my group needs.

 

From my experiences what you are seeing is an anomaly, but maybe I'm just blessed with a great group of heroes around me.  If thats what you are looking for look me up in game and join us.

[Galaxy Brain]

That sounds really fun! But then I'm curious, why come in and shout down discussion about adding difficulty if you are a thrill seeker? 

[Infinitum]

14 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

That sounds really fun! But then I'm curious, why come in and shout down discussion about adding difficulty if you are a thrill seeker? 

I'm not shouting down discussion for ADDING difficulty, I even posted a trial to replicate a hero version of charge of the light brigade.

 

I'm just not a fan of all the talk of increasing difficulty by nerfing the powers, iOS, incarnate etc.

 

We need an incarnate stomping enemy to be introduced that we can eventually gain the upper hand with.

 

There are a few that already exist but are kinda generic still, MOT, Magesterium, Mind of mayhem

 

Stuff like that is still a challenge but we need more like that, that a team of 8 can engage. 

Edited January 21, 2020 by Infinitum

[Galaxy Brain]

I agree, but in the same token I feel that only adding ends up looping back into the problems that are fundamental in a game designed like this. If you keep on adding up and up you create bigger gaps.

[golstat2003]

9 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Edit: I responded to this in a not so nice tone due to some personal stuff I'm going through that made me snappy. 

 

I recognize that many players probably see no issue with difficulty, but there is a vocal population who do want something more to chew on that does not involve actively trying to gimp themselves with bad enhancements / etc. Seeing what could be provided in optional content for those who would enjoy it is a net positive IMO.

 

 

As long as it is optional, I see no reason not to make some harder difficulties. Spending time re-balancing the entire game . . . no. We have better things to do.

 

Key word here is OPTIONAL.

[golstat2003]

43 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

I agree, but in the same token I feel that only adding ends up looping back into the problems that are fundamental in a game designed like this. If you keep on adding up and up you create bigger gaps.

I think adding is the appropriate way to approach this. With the volunteer dev team we have I'm going to be leary of anything that sounds even close to asking for a large rebalance of large portions of the game. A few weeks back I was like "IOs need to change". But thinking on it and how long it's taken us to get the Tanker changes, no.

 

I think I'd prefer if they spend time expanding content and working on other quality of life suggestions. Adding new difficulty options fine, for those that want to run them. Re-balancing large portions of the game I just don't think is realistic. Now if HC ever becomes legit . . .

Edited January 22, 2020 by golstat2003

[Chris24601]

24 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

I agree, but in the same token I feel that only adding ends up looping back into the problems that are fundamental in a game designed like this. If you keep on adding up and up you create bigger gaps.

Frankly, half the fun IS the gaps. One of the most annoying things SWTOR ever did was level syncing you to their zones so the opponents there would always be a threat. No going back to the starter worlds and just mowing through gangsters like the powerhouse Jedi who faced the Sith Emperor in single combat... no it has to be a challenge (because they have developed so little new content they need you to still run eight year old repeatable content as filler).

 

Imagine if every time you traveled to Atlas Park you’d be exemplared down to level 5 so that the Hellions and Skulls there would always pose a threat to your hero? No more satisfaction in one-shotting an entire purse-snatching spawn with a single power that throws the villains back a hundred feet because we need everything to be a “challenge.”

 

I’ll say the same thing I said elsewhere. There’s an even bigger gap between level 1 and 50 than between an SO and full-set IO build; so let’s just get rid of levels 2-50 to make it more challenging for everyone.

 

The problem isn’t IO’s. The problem is some people think it’s too easy to get them in terms of continuing to develop your character; that they aren’t running the “RIGHT KIND” of content (in their opinion) to get those rewards.

 

You wanting harder content shouldn’t take away the fun that people are having with the difficulty exactly where it is. Some people aren’t here for the “challenge.” Some people just want to blow off steam by punching digital fascists in the face and being able to plow through whole spawns of them IS THE FUN.

 

I am not opposed to harder content. I love making Praetorians because of that extra level of challenge. But some nights I also just want to punch hordes of Nazis and space aliens in the face. The fact that I can do both in the same game with the same character just by choosing different settings and content is AMAZING.

 

You don’t have to take away other people’s fun to get yours if your real goal is just to have more challenging content.

[Galaxy Brain]

@Chris24601 I meant gaps as in like... comparing tw/bio to bs/nin in today's meta.

[Nemu]

The game is easy because people can play stupid and get away with it and it's easy to skip challenging content. Challenging mechanics are already implemented in this game. Factions like Rularuu or Vanguard, end game family bosses, carnies and malta, arachnos and longbow at +4/8 will prove challenging to an average team.

 

IOs are fine, even IOed out toons get ripped apart by some of these factions if they play stupid.

 

One mechanic I like is the trigger on death effects like Nemesis vengeance and exploding on death mobs and super stunner self rez that does damage and carries a hefty recovery debuff. They do make you think twice about nuking/zerging but they are not punishing enough for people that just smash and don't think. What if you had a boss that gained increased stats for each minion/lt in the spawn like kheldians but used howling twilight when the lackeys die. I like the trigger on death mechanic because it doesn't render judgement/nukes useless but it does force players to make tactical decisions.

 

Target prioritization is something more people need to learn and the penalties for ignoring problem mobs should be more severe.  I like the idea of mobs that gain potency over time like a sapper that starts AOE sapping and gains more hitpoints/resistance/defense the longer you leave it alive, or mobs that evolve to use stronger debuffs the longer you leave them alone. The other problem with sappers and other problem mobs is that they are generally low density. If there is more than one problem mob in a x6 to x8 spawn that also forces a team to make tactical decisions.

 

But even if those mechanics are built in/introduced people still have the option to skip them which is why I think they should be included in some trials/TFs. They are still optional but now there is greater incentive to run them because there are rewards tied to it. Just one or two missions with those mechanics and don't make those TFs long like the shard TFs.

 

My experience is that half the people that I encounter in PUGs get carried and the other half carry. My SG/Coalition has plenty of people that don't understand/care for game mechanics but still enjoy the game. Oh the other hand I'm fortunate enough to be a part of a group that has many skilled players so I also experience the opposite end of the spectrum where even the hardest content gets trivialized. An overhaul of difficulty is probably not necessary for the general populace, just look at the number of people asking for builds on the forums, but it would be a nice change of pace for the people doing the carrying.

 

[Lines]

8 hours ago, Infinitum said:

 

I'm just not a fan of all the talk of increasing difficulty by nerfing the powers, iOS, incarnate etc.

 

I think dramatic rebalances to players is way too deadly to the ecosystem to change. I stay well away from those sorts of conversations.

 

Maybe in hindsight, the game could have had different player values in the first place, but it's way too late to change them.

 

I voted for the option "feel that only certain parts of the game need to be looked at (IOs, Incarnates, etc)", but thinking neither IOs nor Incarnates should be changed. More in that 'etc' bit.

 

And for a lot of it, adding challenge just means bringing the elements that totally lack challenge or reward up to standard, rather than excessively difficult. Like streetsweeping.

 

I'd also like to draw a distinction between challenge and difficulty, where difficulty is the balance and the relative level difference between enemies and players, which is set by notoriety. The game is difficult enough for me. Heck, I usually play on +2 for the sake of speed.

 

Challenges are more like unusual encounters, need for strategy, making clever use of powers, obstacles or even just storytelling gimmicks. The older content of the game sucked at this and has aged badly. So it's finding ways to make some of that old content feel more interesting via challenge and reward. This is also where finding opportunities for control and support classes comes into it, though that's still quite a nebulous aspiration.

Edited January 22, 2020 by Lines

[Haijinx]

3 hours ago, Lines said:

 

 

Maybe in hindsight, the game could have had different player values in the first place, but it's way too late to change them.

 

This is how I see it.  But if you state it, there tends to be a kneejerk reaction every time.

 

If you were going to design a new game, there is no way you would balance it like this one. 

 

But this is the game we've got. 

 

There is no way they are going to nerf IOs and certain sets now.  Nor should they really.

 

But never been dumb enough to fuel the power inflation back when they did? Well it would have been nice.  

Edited January 22, 2020 by Haijinx

[Llewellyn Blackwell]

14 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

 

Id say the majority is happy that the game is even back, but that is a given. Nobody playing CoH in 2020 is pissed that CoH is back and they can play it lol.

 

Being able to choose the content is great! But, I think a decent portion of us are also feeling a bit worn out that all people want to do is run council missions or AE farms, DFB, etc. Hell, even just running story arcs isn't done in favor of just doing Radios, and of those usually the get a glowie or defeat the boss radios specifically. Being able to pick and choose content is great but there is no risk vs reward most of the time, which leads to the easiest content being the go-to.

 

Some people want to play the game just to play the game, which is great. All the power to them if they just wanna hop on and smoosh council forever. Some people also wanna run the Night Ward missions for the experience of the later content that has new mechanics and stories but have trouble finding anybody who wants to do that with them when they could just run radios for the same experience. Some people want to deck out their characters and throw them at something meaningful to really test themselves too instead of using their fully decked out incarnate to solo a team's radio mission. The beauty of CoH is that you really get to play how you want to, but there seems to be a downside to that where it sort of pays to take the easy route in terms of rewards / effort. As Chris says above, a Carnie boss is the exact same as a council boss when it comes to the rewards to take them down, so the incentive is to just mow down council since they are less hassle. 

 

From my point of view, that is what is harming people's choices when at large some of the more interesting encounters in the game are actively avoided because there are far easier alternatives to throw your OP characters at. When a majority of teams opt for that, then new players and vets alike can often miss out on trying cool content they otherwise could be playing because its not as effecient or face-rolly.

I think there is a subtle issue your missing with your above. Who is willing to lead and organize such things? The reason people do things like PI radio teams is because they are easy to put together and players can easily come and go from them. The fact TFs and certain longer story arcs can take a good chunk of time especially on a full team wiping maps to finish that it becomes a reason for many who are more casual to hesitate to run them

 

I lead TFs often, one of the most frequent ways people part ways at the end is by saying something along the lines of thanks for putting this together. They say that because and I say this with no negativity meant, they are just not the type to try to put together or lead a team. I dont see it as them being social inept or afraid as some ruder types often suggest but I do think its because some feel a sense of pressure when having the star that simply dampens their fun. For example when Im on a toon with no ways to help allies, and allies keep dieing I drop down the dif because I get bothered by allies dieing often when Im not. I dont want them feeling useless or like I see them only as veng bait.

 

Some people are likely still running that harder and less team run content, but they are likely doing it solo at their own pace. I met one guy said he spent a week soloing his way through the doc Q after he read it had no AV. That is likely the best example I got for you right there. No one wants to brag about something like that typically so people solo slomoing their way through things like that are not in general adding those stories to the bigger narrative of our forum discussions.

 

Honestly one of the barriers Id love to see removed but cant see how is the whole lock in for tfs and flashbacks. The only answer I have come up with in my head that even close to works is taking all longer content and breaking it down into shorter bites, like the sig story arcs, so that people can more easily enjoy running them as a team without needing hours at a time free to do so.

 

And then there is content preference ofcourse I myself for example love running those things that relate to the midnight club with my SG of the same name. So last night after recruiting a recent returnee on a nifty magical rp toon to the club I took him on part 1 and 2 of who will die, because ofcourse chapter 2 heavily features the midnighters. He seemed to have a ton of fun and didnt even know about sig arcs. But I know people who for example will never run say the night ward arcs, they hate every aspect of it and the mobs used there, I love it and the story so will solo or team those arcs often. Many people will resist seeing rewards added to content they genuinely dont want to run, because they see it as rewards being added for other players they wont enjoy getting for themselves.

[Llewellyn Blackwell]

9 hours ago, Chris24601 said:

Frankly, half the fun IS the gaps. One of the most annoying things SWTOR ever did was level syncing you to their zones so the opponents there would always be a threat. No going back to the starter worlds and just mowing through gangsters like the powerhouse Jedi who faced the Sith Emperor in single combat... no it has to be a challenge (because they have developed so little new content they need you to still run eight year old repeatable content as filler).

 

Imagine if every time you traveled to Atlas Park you’d be exemplared down to level 5 so that the Hellions and Skulls there would always pose a threat to your hero? No more satisfaction in one-shotting an entire purse-snatching spawn with a single power that throws the villains back a hundred feet because we need everything to be a “challenge.”

 

I’ll say the same thing I said elsewhere. There’s an even bigger gap between level 1 and 50 than between an SO and full-set IO build; so let’s just get rid of levels 2-50 to make it more challenging for everyone.

 

The problem isn’t IO’s. The problem is some people think it’s too easy to get them in terms of continuing to develop your character; that they aren’t running the “RIGHT KIND” of content (in their opinion) to get those rewards.

 

You wanting harder content shouldn’t take away the fun that people are having with the difficulty exactly where it is. Some people aren’t here for the “challenge.” Some people just want to blow off steam by punching digital fascists in the face and being able to plow through whole spawns of them IS THE FUN.

 

I am not opposed to harder content. I love making Praetorians because of that extra level of challenge. But some nights I also just want to punch hordes of Nazis and space aliens in the face. The fact that I can do both in the same game with the same character just by choosing different settings and content is AMAZING.

 

You don’t have to take away other people’s fun to get yours if your real goal is just to have more challenging content.

Actually towards the final years of live there was an active discussion on if using the same levelless always con system GMs use on every mob in the game wouldnt make it more interesting. Keep in mind weaker mobs would still have fewer powers so hellions wouldnt be a threat to an incarnate but it would basically mean people could engage in content in any zone and all content would be for all levels, this discussion ofcourse involved changing xp rewards to by the faction since obviously the factions made for high level would be more powerful. In such a case carnies for example would def be worth a lot more then many easier factions.

[Galaxy Brain]

31 minutes ago, Bentley Berkeley said:

I think there is a subtle issue your missing with your above. Who is willing to lead and organize such things? The reason people do things like PI radio teams is because they are easy to put together and players can easily come and go from them. The fact TFs and certain longer story arcs can take a good chunk of time especially on a full team wiping maps to finish that it becomes a reason for many who are more casual to hesitate to run them

Agreed, but at the same time you can just run a ton of easy PI radios and get roughly the same reward for 1/2 the effort. Mowing down tons of enemies gives you tons of dice rolls for loot which can more or less equal out to the merits / hr you could get from TF's when it comes to AH stuff (sell good recipes for cash to buy the ones you want ~~ get merits to buy what you want). This ends up with the "basic" team formations going after the easy stuff while you need truly dedicated groups to go after even the "normal" content. 

 

I also agree that I would rather not nerf things, but we can't just take that off the table entirely. When making harder content you then have to account for what the players can do... and if you're up against PB + Farsight, then it gets tricky if that becomes the standard you have to run with and everything else is left in the dust.

[DrRocket]

I support change, but adding difficulty must be balanced across all archtypes and not impact some more than others.

 

For example, the present concept of challenge is the spam use of Status Effects, which has a disproportiante impact on support classes. Other forms of challenge is bountiful debuffs usually against defense which again has a disproportionate impact on support classes who depends on defense to survive, then lastly the attack types may be coded type/positional or positional only or type only which once more has a diproportionate effect on support classes who can't get enough defense to everything and resistance to all forms of damage in sufficient amounts to make a difference can be difficult at best.

 

So increasing difficulty in my opinion is going to be tough if being arbitrary about it is something to avoid.

 

I have tanks, brutes, scrappers, infiltrators and all of them can get outstanding defense and resistances, so usually defense debuffs and spam status effects provide little concern to me, and the positional vs type attacks once more are of little consequence to my melee types since they have reasonably good resistances.

 

As it is, playing a support class I have all the challenge I can get, not sure I would cherish making it tougher on my support classes. The challenge I experience in the game is a stark contrast between my melee and my support alts.

 

Perhaps the increase in challenge should be aimed more towards how to make melee players' experience more challenging?

 

For example, support has to acquire Clarion to have a chance against Status Effect, while a melee has absolutely no need for it because of how the game was designed. It would be interesting to allow melee to experience what support has to contend with Status Effects and thus have melee types develop new survival skills, for instance have certain "new" groups or specific groups say carnival of shadows whose status effects ignore standard status effect protections, and the only way to overcome them is by them using Clarion, or have a support class remove/protect from the effect such as a Storm Defender's O2 boost. This challenge would make a terrific change on game play mechanics, for a melee without support would simply have a very tough time surviving just as it is now for support archtypes. Same pattern could go to have certain mobs such as Tsoo instead of debuffing defense, they debuff resistance instead and thus the melee would depend on the support giving them back their resistances or plenty of back up healing.

 

Perhaps the new challenge would be to make the melee and support inter-dependency for mission success and survival be truly two way, as it now in general (there are always exceptions) support has a greater dependency on melee than otherwise (proof of this can be see in farming, check the various class statistics, and it will be evident which classes dominate).

 

But no matter what, I would strongly prefer if this is to be done in a way were there is an option at the beginning of a mission/TF to have them or not.

 

V/R

[Llewellyn Blackwell]

19 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Agreed, but at the same time you can just run a ton of easy PI radios and get roughly the same reward for 1/2 the effort. Mowing down tons of enemies gives you tons of dice rolls for loot which can more or less equal out to the merits / hr you could get from TF's when it comes to AH stuff (sell good recipes for cash to buy the ones you want ~~ get merits to buy what you want). This ends up with the "basic" team formations going after the easy stuff while you need truly dedicated groups to go after even the "normal" content. 

 

I also agree that I would rather not nerf things, but we can't just take that off the table entirely. When making harder content you then have to account for what the players can do... and if you're up against PB + Farsight, then it gets tricky if that becomes the standard you have to run with and everything else is left in the dust.

I think you discount something else, at least on everlasting many of us are RPers. I frequently lead PI teams with a dark/bio scrapper by the name of llewellyn blackwell. He is actually an RP team centric toon yet can do a pretty good job of soloing x2 and x3+8 and witha  team just gets nasty. I often broadcast that lowbies are welcome as are all AT, between leaderships toggles and veng plus my barrier rezzing 2 at a time I do a pretty good job help even a team of pure lowbies stay alive and feel effective. 1 goes down and we get mean as I like to say. These teams can often become impromptu rp teams because of the community, and guess qhat everyone loves punching frelling nazi man. Sure they are easier mobs  I usually only avoid carnies because they are slowing me down not threatening me. But I want my team to feel effective no matter the level spread having a team of such wide ranging levels is imo a strength of coh's side kick system.

 

I mean I rather like the carnies as a concept I dont even see the mistress as really all taht evil were as nazi be nazi and space parasites be space parasites so Im gonna kill council and love it. hence why citadel and the striga tfs are some of my faves.

[SimpleGeekAce]

I haven't posted much on the forums, though I've been playing since Nov, and read the forums/reddit often.

For me, personally, changing globally the difficulty or nerfing anything globally would make me want to play less and less.  I played CoH on and off over the years, just due to life. But it was a grindfest for me. I never felt like I was getting anywhere in 3-4 hours. Running nearly the same stuff, over and over, at -1/2 or 0/1, was not fun.  I couldn't make inf, I had to deal with TOs/DOs/SOs.  I didn't like getting on teams because I felt I didn't understand how to team with my build or knew what to do in most of them (even though for the most part, unlike other games, most TFs hardly have any variations of kill/find mechanics; at the time, I didn't know that).

Fast forward to now.  Priorities in life, experiences in playing different games.  Coming back to an old game that I never got to see things past level 30. I have one 50 (who is my inf farmer and general 'check out content' character), with a lvl 44 who I want to actually do content on.  I can play at my own pace, on my own time.  If I want to team up, I can find teams. If I want to solo stuff, I can. If I want to farm, I can. If I want to scale up/down difficulty, I can.  If I want to kit my characters out in sets, I can.

I never push my needs/wants on anyone else.  I personally want to be able to play through earlier arcs at +1-3/X and not feel like I'm dealing with small packs of mobs of mobs like I did when I was playing on live.  I purposely am getting to 50 so I can go back with a fully kitted out character, for my enjoyment, to go through arcs and still feel powerful. Not having to set stuff at -1/2 and wiffing, running out of end, or being bored because there's a lot of empty space in large maps with little groups of 2-4 mobs space horribly in them.  I have a TON of fun when I had all my expensive set IOs doing Manticore and a few other arcs/TFs, set at +2/4, running into rooms not knowing much about the missions, and running into groups of 8-10+.  Just came around a corner and was like 'oh this is totally not the bathroom.'   This was challenging to me.

I rarely team anymore because the few times I did, people just rolled through it. My first run through the Council TF was just following behind 2 sets of robots henchmen while the leader and his friend stealth supersped to the various bosses/glowies.  Sometimes we'd get into rooms and my brute would actually get to punch one or two things before all the mobs died. It wasn't fun. Quick, sure. Rewarding, eh, sure for merits/xp/inf, but not satisfactory per say.

My point is, for me, this game has tons of options and everything should be optional.  Yes, I feel like risk vs reward for a lot of stuff should be looked at.  Adding in OPTIONAL means of increasing difficulty sounds solid but I'm not a programmer so no idea how hard it would be. Same with creating challenging missions/TFs for those that want some challenges.  But if they are implemented somehow, atleast make it rewarding.

And I see the flip side in that people may feel left out because they can't do the challenges but want the rewards.  That's just the FOMO mentality that a lot get, myself included. I played WoW for years, and I hated that some of the coolest looking stuff was gated behind harder challenges. I just never had the time nor the skill to get there, and it made me enjoy the game less.  I played FFXIV for years, and while only a few things were locked initially behind gated stuff, eventually it was accessible, and so I got to finally have the cool stuff I wanted.  I also don't like to have to grind endlessly, and I'm glad that the HC devs made sure it was easier to get inf and could finally see what all this fuss about sets and IOs was about.

But I also did not enjoy those games because I was forced to have to group to enjoy the game.  Yes, I get it, they're multi-player games (and this one is too).  But I like the social aspect of the game, not the forced grouping.  And I played tanks in both games.  It became a job, especially with WoW, running dungeons, knowing strats for each dungeon, having to know a little about each class so that I knew exactly what people in my groups brought to the table.  Same with FFXIV.

I don't like the trinity. I want to be me, whether I'm a tough hard to kill character, a high damage glass cannon, or a support type. If I group, I feel like a game should be able to adapt to the makeup of the group.  All tank-types? Tons of hard hitting glass cannon mobs to wear you down, but not really stop you if you don't play smart.  All hard hitting DPS?  Have fun slaughtering all the minions and have fun tearing through the massive amounts of hit points on this boss?  Support characters?  Mobs might have some means to work around the various abilities, but still challenge the players. Not many games do that, and not sure if any will break the trinity.  Those that do often times don't have other exciting parts of games I enjoy.

That being said, let's just all enjoy the game in how we want to play it personally.  Don't do global changes, unless it makes individual sense (such as bringing powersets and the like more in line with each other).  Do put out opt in challenges and difficulties for those that want it.  Increase rewards vs risk for a lot of stuff in game that many find challenging (for whatever reason).

Just my thoughts.

[Illy]

I personally like a game that pushes back. It makes me think at least slightly. I'm disheartened that anything like this degree of difficulty (which is basic, imo) will be added to the game, based on the overwhelmingly toxic response I got when I once merely asked on the forums what difficult content the game has to offer. 

 

As I browse through this thread, it looks like that response was not an anomaly. I can see people stating their preference for higher difficulty, and they are called things like "insecure" or "blowhards", or hilariously baseless assumptions are made about their self-esteem in real life. The most common retort is that those who want higher difficulty have nothing else to live for and are using the game as a means to self-esteem. 

 

I've never encountered this in any other game from any community. Its extremely unhealthy. I want the game to be difficult for the same reason I want chess to be difficult. Its not fun to me if my enemy's pieces just fall over by themselves. 

 

 

Edited January 22, 2020 by Illy

[Chris24601]

I haven’t seen much of this so-called questioning of self-esteem or insecurity that @Illy speaks of.

 

What I see is people perfectly happy with the present difficulty who don’t like it when other people say the things they enjoy should be taken away... especially when there is plenty of more difficult content available if you choose to engage with it.

 

And that does lead people to question the motives/psychology involved when the demand isn’t “add this” but instead “take this from others.” It gets further questioned when people start saying it’s unhealthy to not want a game that pushes back.

 

Also of note, is that the skill level of the people replying here is by no means a representative sample of the player base.

 

I see, at most, a few dozen regular posters on the forum and a couple hundred votes while the player base has over 1200 members playing simultaneously in the middle of a weekday and several thousand at once on weekends. We’re talking self-selected fractional percentages for a sample here.

 

I know players who’ve never gone past SO’s (IOs and the auction house being too much effort) or the default difficulty settings and find the game plenty challenging.

 

Illy mentioned wanting a challenging chess game, but most computer chess games have a variety of setting levels and plenty of people have trouble with even the lowest difficulty levels on chess matches and I highly doubt anyone here is playing at Deep Blue levels of difficulty.

 

I will gladly support any OPTIONAL increases in difficulty presented (new zones, new villain groups, new difficulty toggles), but demanding other people change the way they play to satisfy your preferences, particularly in a long-running game with well established standards, is not going to fly.

 

 

[Illy]

When I used the word unhealthy, I meant the suppression of debate by the use of insults. Sorry if my wording was unclear. 

 

I agree with you that an optional increase in difficulty is acceptable. No need to reinvent the game.

 

In response to some other suggestions I have seen, right now not even the option exists outside of meta-gaming and self-nerfing, which is for me entirely insufficient. Its pretending that the game is something that its not. And how far would a player be willing to take it? Blindfolding his or herself in real life? 

[Lines]

I think this thread has largely been very well behaved. The topic is quite a prickly one by nature, and can easily meander into territories thay make people uneasy about the ways the game could change. It's good that those boundaries are clarified.

 

We definitely don't need to try to assess the psychological state of other posters, though. A forum post does not provide anywhere near enough resolution to intricately understand the poster.