About incarnate level shifts

[thunderforce]

It seems to me that incarnate level shifts have several unwanted effects.

 

First of all, they exacerbate the way that non-Incarnates on mixed teams are reduced to spear carriers. (Of course, this could be addressed by having sidekicking up to 50+ make you 50, not 49).

 

Secondly, on Homecoming, you can get Incarnate drops from any enemy defeated provided they are even-con or higher. Suppose someone normally plays at around +0, for whatever reason. An incarnate shift means they almost have to crank this up to +1 or +3, depending... in order to do exactly what they'd be doing anyway, but with slightly bigger numbers. The incarnate shift doesn't do them any good at all, except inasmuch as they get slightly more XP and inf; I think it's worth considering whether you should get more XP and inf for defeating an even-con minion at "50+3" than at 50, since it is no more challenging, and your veteran levels and AH desires don't cost any more XP or inf because you are 50+3.

 

Thirdly, suppose someone normally plays at higher Notoriety. Their incarnate shift can make it impossible for them to have the difficulty they enjoy. It's actively damaging their gameplay, which is why we regularly see requests for +7/+8.

 

 

What are the benefits of the level shift?

 

It can let the person who normally plays on +0 and has an AT/build that struggles with DA mobs do missions they couldn't do otherwise if they're willing to forgo incarnate drops. That's undeniably a benefit, but it's not clear that there's much that can't be solved by putting it down to -1, which is like a level shift but on-demand rather than forced.

 

It lets people feel good about beating "+4" provided they don't care that it is essentially just +1 renamed. To be frank, I don't think this is useful.

 

It's a great help in iTrials.

 

(ETA: it can let people solo TFs they couldn't otherwise. If this is felt to be desirable, allowing Incarnates to have -1 Notoriety apply in all content would have the same effect, but again the reduction in difficulty would be optional, not forced.)

 

 

Hence I propose the level shift apply only in iTrials. Now, I know this is going to get a lot of pushback, to put it mildly, but please try and explain what's wrong with what I wrote above. I'd have pushed back against this idea until I realised all my shiny new level shifts were doing was making me push the Notoriety up and down as I go in and out of DA.

Edited May 12, 2020 by thunderforce

[Parabola]

I've long been of the opinion that the level shift in normal content was a terrible idea. It removes headroom in the difficulty curve at exactly the point at which the players are gaining extra power relative to the game content anyway. It makes absolutely no sense to me and I really can't see that it achieves anything worthwhile.

Edited May 12, 2020 by parabola

[SurfD]

2 hours ago, thunderforce said:

It lets people feel good about beating "+4" provided they don't care that it is essentially just +1 renamed. To be frank, I don't think this is useful.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that only 1 of the 3 level shifts applied to "general" content, and that you have to be in Incarnate specific content (DA, Itrials, Cim?) for the other 2 to kick in).

 

So unless you are specifically running DA / ITrial content, your max level shift is only going to be +1, rather than +3 (meaning that beating non Icontent +4's is comparable to a +3, rather than a +1).

[thunderforce]

52 minutes ago, SurfD said:

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that only 1 of the 3 level shifts applied to "general" content, and that you have to be in Incarnate specific content (DA, Itrials, Cim?) for the other 2 to kick in).

You are correct. However, there's a fair chunk of DA to feel good about beating "+4" that isn't in, and I think the way that incarnate level shifts do most damage when a 3-level shift is available (because someone who likes to play actually at +4 can't get even close) helps to illustrate why actually they're harmful outside of iTrials.

[RobotLove]

You can unequip your incarnate abilities at any time, thus removing your level shifts.

 

Non-problem solved.

[thunderforce]

11 minutes ago, RobotLove said:

You can unequip your incarnate abilities at any time, thus removing your level shifts.

Non-problem solved.

I did wonder if I should just anticipate this response and reply to it in advance. Why do you want to deny people the option of playing with incarnate abilities, but against tough enemies at a bona-fide +4?

[nihilii]

42 minutes ago, thunderforce said:

Why do you want to deny people the option of playing with incarnate abilities, but against tough enemies at a bona-fide +4?

But he doesn't want to deny anything, as this is the status quo. You are the one opening the topic for the sole purpose of denying people passive level shifts.

Stopping at T2 Alpha and T4 everything else will let you face true +4s in most content with minimal difference compared to T3/T4 Alpha. We're talking about maybe a ~15-20% enhancement difference in the one or two aspects your alpha provides you.

If the DA content is really a problem to you, well, stop at T2 Lore and T2 Destiny. T2 Destiny is admittedly a pretty big change (but surely you cannot think Destiny is balanced if you feel level shifts are broken - Destiny is tremendously more powerful than level shifts, at least in my opinion), but T2 Lore probably won't change much because how often do you pull out Lore in regular gameplay, really.

Edited May 12, 2020 by nihilii

[Parabola]

I dislike the 'tie one arm behind your back' line of reasoning. The game provides mechanisms for gaining power and utility and everyone should be free to use those to the fullest. It is incumbent on the game to provide enough challenge to make using those tools worthwhile.

 

What is the level shift in regular content actually achieving? What benefit is it to anyone? If there is anyone who struggles at -1x1 at lv50 I would be astonished. I cannot see why taking it away and allowing regular content to be run at +4 is anything but a good thing?

[Zeraphia]

This really just speaks to me as needing more difficult non-trial (read 8-24 people required) content that's more tailored to people having incarnate abilities.

[thunderforce]

43 minutes ago, nihilii said:

But he doesn't want to deny anything, as this is the status quo.

And the status quo does deny people that option, so supporting the status quo means being in favour of denying people that option. Which seems an odd thing to be in favour of, given that a constant topic here is people's desire for more challenge to be available and that removing level shifts would provide that without denying anyone any particular kind of gameplay (since fighting 53s at 53 is really extremely like fighting 50s at 50).

Edited May 12, 2020 by thunderforce

[Greycat]

39 minutes ago, parabola said:

What is the level shift in regular content actually achieving?

A reward for getting to 50 and getting alpha slotted that far. Which, frankly, for all my gripes about the rest of the incarnate system, I'm fine with.

[Parabola]

11 minutes ago, Greycat said:

A reward for getting to 50 and getting alpha slotted that far. Which, frankly, for all my gripes about the rest of the incarnate system, I'm fine with.

But the alpha ability itself gives you a reward with more enhancement for your powers. All the level shift is doing is removing the ability to use that newfound power against +4s.

 

I agree that the alpha slot is the best part of the incarnate system but it doesn't need the level shift in regular content to be powerful or rewarding.

Edited May 12, 2020 by parabola

[Caulderone]

I've posted this in a couple of similar threads in the past:

 

Add an option in the Incarnate menu to check a set of boxes and disable the level shift and incarnate shifts.  That way, those who want to experience actual +4 difficulty in DA can have it.  I do think those check boxes should be ignored for iTrials, so as to not penalize the whole raid for someone forgetting to uncheck the boxes.

 

For now, a Tier 1 or 2 Alpha, Destiny, and Lore (or no Lore at all) is the way to do so.

[skoryy]

7 hours ago, thunderforce said:

It lets people feel good about beating "+4" provided they don't care that it is essentially just +1 renamed. To be frank, I don't think this is useful.

But why?

[thunderforce]

3 minutes ago, skoryy said:

But why?

We had an interesting discussion on Discord about this. What I mean, I suppose, is that of course people enjoy a sense of progression - but to me a very strong sense of progression is given by unlocking and improving incarnate abilities, because there are definite changes in gameplay (which is why "just don't slot them" is not a good answer), but there's only a very weak sense of progression from fighting 54s at level 50+3 rather than the exact same mobs, 51, at level 50. In the latter case, if you weren't allowed to see mob levels you would find it pretty hard even to know it had changed.

 

Another way of putting it is that I feel that beating "+4" when level shifts have made it functionally +1 is a bit like filling my wallet with photocopies of money and then telling myself I'm rich. I appreciate there _are_ people who enjoy that, but in my view the damage done to people who want bona-fide +4 and can't have it is much greater, and the constant complaints about challenge levels seem to bear that out.

[Reiska]

The entire original point of new!Dark Astoria as a zone was to give soloists a way to unlock and use Incarnate powers, albeit at a slower rate than players who were willing to do the incarnate trials.

 

Obviously, on Homecoming this purpose has been obviated by the advent of veteran levels and incarnate drops being proliferated game-wide, thus exposing this issue.  The best solution, IMO, would be an option amongst all the difficulty slider stuff allowing you to simply give all your enemies incarnate shifts too.  For those worried about it not being lore-appropriate, you can either not use it, or make it only apply to DA, or something.

[EmmySky]

2 hours ago, parabola said:

It is incumbent on the game to provide enough challenge to make using those tools worthwhile.

Negative.

 

It is incumbent on the game to provide whatever the developers code into it, preferably unbuggy.  It is incumbent on the player to assess what the game provides regarding difficulty and challenge and compare that to the tools the game provides to compensate or overcome aforementioned difficulty and challenge and to then choose the tools and playstyle that the player finds most fun.

 

It is not possible for every player of every game to demand the developers add/remove what they have coded in order to meet the needs of each and every one of those players.  This is especially true for a game that died years ago and is only being developed part time in the spare time of a handful of volunteers.

 

I am all for options.  I like the tickbox option someone mentioned.  I just take umbrage at someone saying the game has a responsibility to provide something beyond what it is coded to do.  It comes across as demanding.

[Apparition]

Dark Astoria is Incarnate content, just like Incarnate trials.

 

/jranger

[Parabola]

2 hours ago, EmmySky said:

Negative.

 

It is incumbent on the game to provide whatever the developers code into it, preferably unbuggy.  It is incumbent on the player to assess what the game provides regarding difficulty and challenge and compare that to the tools the game provides to compensate or overcome aforementioned difficulty and challenge and to then choose the tools and playstyle that the player finds most fun.

 

It is not possible for every player of every game to demand the developers add/remove what they have coded in order to meet the needs of each and every one of those players.  This is especially true for a game that died years ago and is only being developed part time in the spare time of a handful of volunteers.

 

I am all for options.  I like the tickbox option someone mentioned.  I just take umbrage at someone saying the game has a responsibility to provide something beyond what it is coded to do.  It comes across as demanding.

If this was a single player game I would wholeheartedly agree with you. I've played plenty of games that were very poorly balanced but that offered huge scope for manipulating the game to create possibly unintended but fun playstyles. I played years of Skyrim while CoH was mia and thoroughly enjoyed breaking the mechanics of the game and self balancing to create a satisfying experience (that game company couldn't balance mechanics if their lives depended on it).

 

However, CoH is a very different kind of game. MMO's are built around a very carefully constructed difficulty curve. They need to offer just the right balance between challenge and reward to incentivise play and they need to provide a satisfying experience to everyone playing different roles in teams. They can't be user balanced because we all have to share the environment and play together. This isn't saying that it is the devs responsibility because I demand that they do what I like but that the type of game this is requires system balance to work.

 

In my opinion the original devs got things quite badly wrong when they introduced the incarnate system. Giving all AT's access to pets and nukes was just crazy in a role based multiplayer game for example. The alpha slot is actually the part of the whole system that I think was the best designed. It fits seamlessly into the existing mechanics and it doesn't affect AT balance at all. My only issue with it is the level shift in regular content.

 

I still cannot see what the point of it is. It just seems bad design. The difficulty curve only goes up to 54 and the alpha slot both makes 54 easier because you are more powerful and then completely arbitrarily transforms 54 from +4 to +3. There doesn't seem a need for it and removing it seems to be of benefit to everyone. If you currently run at say +2 with the incarnate shift, what is the difference with running at +1 without it? Presumably you have to remember to change when exemping down anyway so it would actually save you time.

 

The incarnate content itself is a slightly different matter and not one I'm addressing directly. I see plenty of responses in threads like this that say something like 'we just need more incarnate content'. Well that's fine but new content takes time to create. Surely it's much easier to remove the level shift and allow players to run all the existing regular content at +4?

 

I should possibly say that I used to be a developer and now I am a systems architect. Nothing so fun as games sadly but I can dream! I love CoH because I love its system. I've never really had more than a passing interest in the genre, I've read watchmen but that's it. My background is fantasy through and through but this is and hopefully always will be my mmo because it appeals to me on a system level. I have every respect for the current devs and fully appreciate the limitations they are working under. They are curating the system however and as such I feel they should give serious consideration to removing the level shift in regular play if it is possible to do so. I am certainly not demanding this, nor is it suggested for my personal gain but for what I perceive to be the good of the system.

Edited May 12, 2020 by parabola
Spelling, grammar and ocd.

[Apparition]

1 minute ago, parabola said:

If this was a single player game I would wholeheartedly agree with you. I've played plenty of games that were very poorly balanced but that offered huge scope for manipulating the game to create possibly unintended but fun playstyles. I played years of Skyrim while CoH was mia and thoroughly enjoyed breaking the mechanics of the game and self balancing to create a satisfying experience (that game company couldn't balance mechanics if their lives depended on it).

 

However, CoH is a very different kind of game. MMO's are built around a very carefully constructed difficulty curve. They need to offer just the right balance between challenge and reward to incentivise play and they need to provide a satisfying experience to everyone playing different roles in teams. They can't be user balanced because we all have to share the environment and play together. This isn't saying that it is the devs responsibility because I demand that they do what I like but that the type of game this is requires system balance to work.

 

In my opinion the original devs got things quite badly wrong when they introduced the incarnate system. Giving all AT's access to pets and nukes was just crazy in a role based multiplayer game for example. The alpha slot is actually the part of the whole system that I think was the best designed. It fits seamlessly into the existing mechanics and it doesn't affect AT balance at all. My only issue with it is the level shift in regular content.

 

I still cannot see what the point of it is. It's just seems bad design. The difficulty curve only goes up to 54 and the alpha slot both makes 54 easier because you are more powerful and then completely arbitrarily transforms 54 from +4 to +3. There doesn't seem a need for it and removing it seems to be of benefit to everyone. If you currently run at say +2 with the incarnate shift, what is the difference with running at +1 without it? Presumably you have to remember to change when exemping down anyway so it would actually save you time.

 

The incarnate content itself is a slightly different matter and not one I'm addressing directly. I see plenty of responses in threads like this that say something like 'we just need more incarnate content'. Well that's fine but new content takes time to create. Surely it's much easier to remove the level shift and allow players to run all the existing regular content at +4?

 

I should possibly say that I used to be a developer and now I am a systems architect. Nothing so fun as games sadly but I can dream! I love CoH because I love it's system. I've never really had more than a passing interest in the genre, I've read watchmen but that's it. My background is fantasy through and through but this is and hopefully always will be my mmo because it appeals to me on a system level. I have every respect for the current devs and fully appreciate the limitations they are working under. They are curating the system however and as such I feel they should give serious consideration to removing the level shift in regular play if it is possible to do so. I am certainly not demanding this, nor is it suggested for my personal gain but for what I perceive to be the good of the system.

The whole point of the Incarnate system is that you are more powerful than a plain level 50.  Nothing non-Incarnate should be +4 to you because you have moved beyond them.

[Parabola]

2 minutes ago, Apparition said:

The whole point of the Incarnate system is that you are more powerful than a plain level 50.  Nothing non-Incarnate should be +4 to you because you have moved beyond them.

And you are more powerful because you have extra enhancement and abilities.

 

If they shouldn't be +4 why should they be +3 or +2? The conning is completely arbitrary.

[Bill Z Bubba]

So instead of a nerf, how about we increase the difficulty available? That way, I can go to DA, grab a repeatable mission at the new +7/x10 diff and fight +4s at the aggro cap to my heart's content.

[skoryy]

1 hour ago, parabola said:

They need to offer just the right balance between challenge and reward to incentivise play and they need to provide a satisfying experience to everyone playing different roles in teams.

4300 players a week agree the balance is good, so why?

[Parabola]

14 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

So instead of a nerf, how about we increase the difficulty available? That way, I can go to DA, grab a repeatable mission at the new +7/x10 diff and fight +4s at the aggro cap to my heart's content.

Yeah it would be nice. No idea of course how much dev time it would take. I would argue about what the difference between +4 without the level shift and +5 with it is though. I wouldn't call it a nerf to remove the level shift either - we choose what level to fight against. This isn't removing power from the player it's just adjusting the numbers available for us to choose.

[Bill Z Bubba]

1 minute ago, parabola said:

Yeah it would be nice. No idea of course how much dev time it would take. I would argue about what the difference between +4 without the level shift and +5 with it is though. I wouldn't call it a nerf to remove the level shift either - we choose what level to fight against. This isn't removing power from the player it's just adjusting the numbers available for us to choose.

 

I made a post a while back about removing the 2nd and 3rd level shift entirely. I've since change my view. Just because I don't need them to fight +4s means nothing, especially now that I've played a lot of the squishier combos out there. Removing the level shifts is a nerf. It's a massive reduction in ability for a whole lotta characters.

So, will I /jranger the whole idea? No. Am I forced to call it a nerf? Yes. Would I honestly care one way or the other? Not really. Power creep be real yo. But I would also very much understand why a great many players with a great many characters would be more than ticked off were it to happen.