Are Player Defenses too high

[Crysis]

59 minutes ago, Coyote said:

 

All of these kinds of arguments are a cop-out.

"I have enough evidence to convince myself and you should be convinced also. But if you want to persuade me, go and spend dozens of hours setting up a server, changing the code, balancing it, testing, and then report back. Then I'll be willing to listen."

Basically, introducing an impossible bar in an argument under the guise of "but if you have evidence, I'll be most happy to take a look".

The argument cuts both ways. Go ahead and create such a server, make the changes, spend all that time, and get back to me showing that the result would be a broken game, and then we can talk.

Now it's you who are taking this too personal.  Let me try to re-phrase my request with full sincerity and a more respectful tone.

 

In any argument FOR change, the burden is ON the person who claims "Change is Needed!" to prove their case.  This is true outside of the game world and we'd both agree on that.

 

Demonstrate a better environment WITH the change.  If you can't or don't want to do that, then SIMULATE it.  Intentionally build a character with only generic IO's (or SO's if you prefer) using only native +DEF, and play it to 50 all the way into Incarnate territory.  Do as much as you can with it.  Then create a duplicate alt but this time with ALL IO's to build +DEF you can come up with.  Try to ensure you follow the same approximate leveling path in terms of missions, critters, environments etc.  Then, subjectively, tell me which was more enjoyable to play?  Where did you feel inadequate and why?  Dissect the "why" parts a bit to differentiate if it was situational or build related.    By the way, this was part of the argument basis for awarding travel powers earlier many years ago, so it's not a totally unique concept, although it was mentioned by the Devs at the time that it factored into their decisions to make that change.

 

Then go sell the results of that new experience to a handful of us.  Make a SG of just these kinds of builds.

 

The capability to do exactly what you want is there right now.  You may argue it's not the same because there are a lot of other players NOT playing that way, and you'd be correct, but you don't have to force them to adapt to your playstyle preferences to test this theory of yours.  It's easily testable the moment you start to recruit people to your SG and your playstyle methodology.

 

Heck, I'd even be willing to join you in this crusade as one of your first recruits.  It's not my preferred playstyle right now, I'll freely admit, but I build kooky stuff all the time just to see how it will play.  

 

But I will wager up front that the single biggest takeaway you'll have, I'd have, any one of us would have isn't how different the game feels with diminished Defense, but how different we feel compared to watching the capabilities of other players around us.  This is why this simulation isn't complete without gaining a panel/peer group of enough similarly-built players to make a fair comparison.  But no amount of coding change will address an individuals' feelings of 'value' to a team.  That's entirely subjective.  

 

But the rest, I'd argue, can be simulated.  And if you are calling for the change....you should prove the change to yourself and then share those results with us before asking us to adopt the same view.  Otherwise, status quo can and should prevail.

 

And please accept my apologies if I've offended you.

 

 

[Pleonast]

I think Defenses and enhancements are fine the way they are. With power choices, IO sets, and the notoriety system, players have enough control over how hard their gameplay is. Does anyone play at the hardest level: +4x8 with SO enhancement (or without enhancements for the truly insane)?

 

But if we want to make changes, I'd suggest two:

1) Up the notoriety maximum to +8x16. Upping the max level would make any defense vulnerable, while making hitting the badguys that much harder. Upping the numbers means some people are going to take hits, simply because some rolls to hit will succeed. More choices for harder missions without giving up interesting builds.

2) Seed the auction house so that every enhancement is available in unlimited quantities at 1000 inf each. Let players put together the builds they want. Instead of haves and haves-not based on time and farming, let players choose what they want to play. We already have gates based on level; I don't see why gates based on drop-rate help gameplay.

[Crysis]

27 minutes ago, Pleonast said:

 

1) Up the notoriety maximum to +8x16. Upping the max level would make any defense vulnerable, while making hitting the badguys that much harder. Upping the numbers means some people are going to take hits, simply because some rolls to hit will succeed. More choices for harder missions without giving up interesting builds.

 

They'd have to reverse the Purple Patch which goes waaaaaay back to like the first couple years of Live.  That's not even talking about what you'd have to adjust upwards for +TOHIT and +ACC and a whole host of adjustments to prevent a player from being one-shotted.  But that's the issue another poster above was trying to demonstrate.  Defenses, Hasten, whatever...they all exist as environmental variables and you can't just change one without introducing a whole host of other changes as well, making it a very complex and time-consuming change.  No easy fix, which is why this argument comes back to "why does this NEED to be fixed/prove that its broken."  

 

23 minutes ago, Pleonast said:

2) Seed the auction house so that every enhancement is available in unlimited quantities at 1000 inf each. Let players put together the builds they want. Instead of haves and haves-not based on time and farming, let players choose what they want to play. We already have gates based on level; I don't see why gates based on drop-rate help gameplay.

I argued this when they just nerfed exemplaring influence as a means to "slow down the accelerated rate of influence creation."  If the issue is concern over influence, just level the field for the price of what influence gets used for in the first place.  Far simpler than changing a fundamental mechanic of the game....just flat-price everything like already exists with DO/SO Vendors.  Problem solved.  Obviously, this would disrupt the enjoyment a small handful of players get from marketeering efforts and/or crafting, so I doubt the devs would ever do this.  Thus, see response to number one.  Everything exists in a system and changing one part of the system is seldom an option to solve the problem, if indeed the problem even exists at all.

[Infinitum]

2 hours ago, Naraka said:

your OCD be damned.  

So basically you are saying I'm not allowed to have fun if having fun is min maxing?

 

Your whole diarretic blob above that said nothing against what I was trying to say for casual players and helping them.

 

Basically any AT can be made to be good, and if someone wants to learn that me and my group teach them.  But its not required, I have people that are fine not being OP and they play with us often, and dont mind the majority of us being built to the 9s.

 

Some people do want to learn and it end up being a fun part of the game for them - as I said it is a mini game.

 

It hs nothing to do with power creep, those same builds get tested in conditions like the ones that have the resistance and incarnate level content.

 

How do I know this because I tried tanking the nightstar mission with my decked out elec storm troller and mob 1 was a team wipe with me first - they overwhelmed my defenses so fast i couldnt react.

 

With a tank that wouldnt have happened, unless they werent built right.

 

There just needs to be more content like this.

 

So no just because there can be any AT at the soft cap doesnt mean that is against the game design or power creep, and boy inside could have used a bubbler on that mission.

 

And seriously take your be damned comment and stow that somewhere, you can ask anyone that knows me in game, I will bleed my life force dry to help someone in game if I can.  You are way off on that.  I described what is fun for me, and there isnt a thing wrong with that.

 

If anything you are in the minority here and trying to be an authoritarian for telling everyone else how you think the game should be played.

[Hardboiled Hero]

4 hours ago, Crysis said:

It’s also POSSIBLE to LEAVE IO’s and DEFENSE values THE FARK ALONE and get your brave butt out to a zone/mission that’s harder than the norm to up your own difficulty level and enjoyment of the game.

 

It’s also POSSIBLE to TARGET those who wish to punish players who enjoy the game AS-IS by claiming that they are somehow doing us all a grand favor by diminishing OUR enjoyment of the game for the benefit of....well, for nobody.  Nobody gains anything from this.  There’s a straw man argument that someone will gain something from this, but I’ve yet to see what the gain is other than to the person/people who simply want everyone else to define “enjoyment” and “casual” under their terms.

 

The only dots I need to connect are the ones that have existed for almost 12 years.  Some people really have an issue with how others define “fun.”  And since they can’t realistically change the definition of fun, they yell for nerfs.  Some of the nerfs of the past made sense when cast against a profit motive that was built around slowing leveling speed, improving longevity of subscriptions, paywall things like Invention licenses, etc.  These reasons, veiled as they were, no longer exist.  So just leave this alone and go find your difficulty that’s already built into the game.  

 

 

  Oddly, you're the one properly using a "straw man argument" here.  I haven't put forth any plans or proposals, so there is no "This" for you to be offended by.  I've clearly said that I'm not really concerned with game difficulty, but I don't think it should be ignored, yet you accuse me of wanting to make the game more difficult.  I've clearly said I want to make the game more fun, but it wouldn't be worth if it diminished the fun for others, yet you accuse me of wanting "Punish players who enjoy the game as is..".  The thing is, I'm the one who mentioned that some playstyles/AT's/Powersets might benefit from changes to defenses, so even though you've gotten everything (I'm pretty sure it's been literally everything) I've said exactly wrong, and have tried to put words in my mouth where I've specifically remained quiet, I know you're talking about me.  I would point out though, that even when I mentioned that some characters might benefit, it couldn't have been a "straw man argument", because it wasn't an argument..  and because a "straw man argument" is when you try to associate an argument with your "opponent" specifically so you can attack it, and I have no opponents here.

[Crysis]

15 minutes ago, Hardboiled Hero said:

  Oddly, you're the one properly using a "straw man argument" here.  I haven't put forth any plans or proposals, so there is no "This" for you to be offended by.  I've clearly said that I'm not really concerned with game difficulty, but I don't think it should be ignored, yet you accuse me of wanting to make the game more difficult.  I've clearly said I want to make the game more fun, but it wouldn't be worth if it diminished the fun for others, yet you accuse me of wanting "Punish players who enjoy the game as is..".  The thing is, I'm the one who mentioned that some playstyles/AT's/Powersets might benefit from changes to defenses, so even though you've gotten everything (I'm pretty sure it's been literally everything) I've said exactly wrong, and have tried to put words in my mouth where I've specifically remained quiet, I know you're talking about me.  I would point out though, that even when I mentioned that some characters might benefit, it couldn't have been a "straw man argument", because it wasn't an argument..  and because a "straw man argument" is when you try to associate an argument with your "opponent" specifically so you can attack it, and I have no opponents here.

My reply wasn’t to you, unless “you” have multiple accounts here?

 

But ok I guess?

[Pleonast]

25 minutes ago, Crysis said:

They'd have to reverse the Purple Patch which goes waaaaaay back to like the first couple years of Live.  That's not even talking about what you'd have to adjust upwards for +TOHIT and +ACC and a whole host of adjustments to prevent a player from being one-shotted.  But that's the issue another poster above was trying to demonstrate.  Defenses, Hasten, whatever...they all exist as environmental variables and you can't just change one without introducing a whole host of other changes as well, making it a very complex and time-consuming change.  No easy fix, which is why this argument comes back to "why does this NEED to be fixed/prove that its broken."  

Actually, I propose increasing the max notoriety level adjustment without changing the purple patch. No one would have to play at +5 or higher. And if they did, they'd suffer the effects of the purple patch. Relatively little coding work for vastly harder play as an option.

[Infinitum]

18 minutes ago, Hardboiled Hero said:

  Oddly, you're the one properly using a "straw man argument" here.  I haven't put forth any plans or proposals, so there is no "This" for you to be offended by.  I've clearly said that I'm not really concerned with game difficulty, but I don't think it should be ignored, yet you accuse me of wanting to make the game more difficult.  I've clearly said I want to make the game more fun, but it wouldn't be worth if it diminished the fun for others, yet you accuse me of wanting "Punish players who enjoy the game as is..".  The thing is, I'm the one who mentioned that some playstyles/AT's/Powersets might benefit from changes to defenses, so even though you've gotten everything (I'm pretty sure it's been literally everything) I've said exactly wrong, and have tried to put words in my mouth where I've specifically remained quiet, I know you're talking about me.  I would point out though, that even when I mentioned that some characters might benefit, it couldn't have been a "straw man argument", because it wasn't an argument..  and because a "straw man argument" is when you try to associate an argument with your "opponent" specifically so you can attack it, and I have no opponents here.

You took the time to make this thread, complete with complaints and polls.

[Pleonast]

32 minutes ago, Crysis said:

I argued this when they just nerfed exemplaring influence as a means to "slow down the accelerated rate of influence creation."  If the issue is concern over influence, just level the field for the price of what influence gets used for in the first place.  Far simpler than changing a fundamental mechanic of the game....just flat-price everything like already exists with DO/SO Vendors.  Problem solved.  Obviously, this would disrupt the enjoyment a small handful of players get from marketeering efforts and/or crafting, so I doubt the devs would ever do this.  Thus, see response to number one.  Everything exists in a system and changing one part of the system is seldom an option to solve the problem, if indeed the problem even exists at all.

I can understand why they want to make changes slowly. I think there needs to be a "big picture" look at what we want this game to be going forward. I think there needs to be a lot fewer timesinks -- low drop rates and other artificial scarcity add very limted gameplay.

[Golden Azrael]

On 5/16/2020 at 5:06 PM, Infinitum said:

I don't think any of those options describes the reality, but the first is closest.

 

1. Defense and resistances are fine.

 

2. Enemy accuracy is fine.

 

3. Some times you have the perfect synergy on a team and you steam roll.

 

4. Some times your synergy is off and you struggle but still succeed.

 

5. Tanks shouldn't due a lot under 99.9% of circumstances. It's easy to build the majority this way.

 

6. Scrappers, stalkers and especially brutes can mimic tank survivability and do increased damage - especially where scrappers and stalkers are concerned.

 

7. Blasters, defenders, controllers, corruptors, dominators, etc - squishies can be built more durable with set bonuses, Incarnates etc but realistically can't survive hard target encounters indefinitely like tanks/melee can without circus tricks.

 

8. Combine all the above with good synergy in any multiples of combinations and thats where you get your steamroller teams.

 

So the non problem above is very complex.

 

The actual issue is with content and options.

 

There should be more incarnate level content and also an elite mode that makes things a bit harder kinda like you would select options in oro.

 

Thats the state of the game right now from someone that plays each night with a variety of players and content.

 

It may seem too easy but thats an illusion because the playerbase are vets and just need more challenges and more options.

 

For your average new player it can still be quite difficult and I run across this often also.  And we help them along as best we can. 

 

Which is why its a great community.

Good idea for an elite mode that works for 'Incarnate IO set built rollers.'

 

Azrael.

[Luminara]

2 hours ago, Coyote said:

Wait, what? Changing one third of the variables in an equation DOES change the math.

 

Not when everyone else can change the other two thirds and return the result to it's previous value.  The math still comes out the same in the end.  2+2 and 3+1 both equal 4.

[Infinitum]

Just now, Luminara said:

 

Not when everyone else can change the other two thirds and return the result to it's previous value.  The math still comes out the same in the end.  2+2 and 3+1 both equal 4.

And that equates to too much trouble for a zero sum gain to a problem that is more percieved by a minority than an actuality for the majority.

[Golden Azrael]

Personally, I found that the difficult levels 1-5 were ok for the pick up and play mainstream crowd from 1-50 with SOs.

 

There's Incarnate trials for those that want to push it.  And soloing the ITF or TFs. 

 

But an elite mode for the game's content in general?

 

Perhaps that 'elite' mode should be focused in Kalista with mobs, general mission content, TFs etc.  Surprise AV attacks on the street...Setting the 'Elite' challenge in mobs, AVs, missions and spawn attacks for those with the incarnate and IO set builds.  A really dangerous zone in the way Bricks would be if you went there as a Talos level hero.

 

So it becomes the successor to P.Isle in terms of post L50 content in general instead of Shift levels being isolated largely to Trials. 

 

I think focusing the uniqueness of story and challenge in Kalista would address those seeking a new story and difficulty challenge.

 

I'm not fond of the Key's trial and the difficulty of it...  Some do.  I'd rather the difficulty challenge where it next goes further plays into the unique attributes of each AT.

 

An elite mode for the game in general?  Perhaps.  But I'd focus that in a 'next gen' 'end game' challenge in an area that is under developed eg. Kalista.  Where this can be a hot bed of focused challenge for devs and player.

 

ie.  You're an incarnate.  Now meet your incarnate challenge.  A zone where the incarnates meet and battle...  Mobs, AVs, factions, Trials, TFs all come together in true end game content where Gods battle Gods on the 'mountain top' of Kalista...

 

Azrael.

Edited May 18, 2020 by Golden Azrael

[Infinitum]

7 minutes ago, Golden Azrael said:

Personally, I found that the difficult levels 1-5 were ok for the pick up and play mainstream crowd from 1-50 with SOs.

 

There's Incarnate trials for those that want to push it.  And soloing the ITF or TFs. 

 

But an elite mode for the game's content in general?

 

Perhaps that 'elite' mode should be focused in Kalista with mobs, general mission content, TFs etc.  Surprise AV attacks on the street...Setting the 'Elite' challenge in mobs, AVs, missions and spawn attacks for those with the incarnate and IO set builds.  A really dangerous zone in the way Bricks would be if you went there as a Talos level hero.

 

So it becomes the successor to P.Isle in terms of post L50 content in general instead of Shift levels being isolated largely to Trials. 

 

I think focusing the uniqueness of story and challenge in Kalista would address those seeking a new story and difficulty challenge.

 

I'm not fond of the Key's trial and the difficulty of it...  Some do.  I'd rather the difficulty challenge where it next goes further plays into the unique attributes of each AT.

 

An elite mode for the game in general?  Perhaps.  But I'd focus that in a 'next gen' 'end game' challenge in an area that is under developed eg. Kalista.  Where this can be a hot bed of focused challenge for devs and player.

 

ie.  You're an incarnate.  Now meet your incarnate challenge.  A zone where the incarnates meet and battle...  Mobs, AVs, factions, Trials, TFs all come together in true end game content where Gods battle Gods on the 'mountain top' of Kalista...

 

Azrael.

Thats All wonderful...  I like it.

[Galaxy Brain]

1 hour ago, Primantis said:

The disconnect between the forum and the actual in-game players has always intrigued me..

 

On the forums : "This game is too easy, lets nerf stuff!"

In-game: "Why did you choose Carnies/Malta/Longbow and not Council for the radio mish? /quit"

 

People sit and talk about how easy the game is, but good luck getting a team of random people to run anything other than EZ-mode content. 

 

I think part of the issue (echoed again in the consolidated difficulty thread) is that there is no benefit to going after carnies over council.

 

Defeating 100 carnies is as valuable as defeating 100 council, which is as valuable as defeating 100 Lamplighters in  Night Ward, which is as valuable as defeating 100 IDF enemies, etc. Often times when given the option, people will definitely opt for the easier path if theres no reason not to. Combine that with how it is relatively easy to negate HUGE amounts of incoming threat with S/L defense and you have an environment where most "PUG" style encounters will opt for the easy route.

 

 

 

 

[Luminara]

2 hours ago, Naraka said:

You're assuming this isn't the desired goal.  That is, shifting things so to get the same current output requires more limited power choices or tactical variance. 

 

There aren't enough relevant and worthwhile power choices to necessitate the kind of limitation you envision.  Everyone has 24 power selections by level 50.  Half of those are frequently used.  Half of the remainder are occasional or emergency options.  The last six are "I had to pick something".  There are simply too many non-viable options available and little reason not to use them to obtain set bonuses.  And of the first half, it's rare that any are so limited in slotting that they can't be slotted differently to achieve the same goal because set bonuses were widely spread across sets for all types of powers.

 

There are no real sacrifices, beyond "Aw, I wanted to use that once per mission power once per mission.  Oh, well, I'll take this other power instead and slot it for a Defense set bonus... and look a little less awesome.  Woe is me."  And the tactical variance you imagine occurring, refer to the previous sentence.

 

2 hours ago, Naraka said:

Again, reaching soft cap isn't a problem, it's the prevalence of it.

 

Do you honestly believe it wasn't always prevalent, or easy?  My TA/Dark hit the Ranged soft cap after three power usages on the original servers (only two of which caused aggro, with fast animations), and I only had 17% Ranged Defense.  And I built for massive +Recharge, not Defense.  That 17% Defense was unplanned happenstance.  And this was before ATOs and Winter IOs.  No mules for Defense bonuses, no crazy frankenslotting to squeeze a little more +Defense in.

 

Soft-capping has always been possible for anyone who understood the mechanics of the game.  Soft-capping was a given once IO sets were introduced, even if Defense bonuses had been flagged as Unique and non-stacking.  Why is it suddenly worthy of attention now?  And how can anyone believe the best solution is nerfing IOs, in light of the above facts?

[Naraka]

1 hour ago, Infinitum said:

So basically you are saying I'm not allowed to have fun if having fun is min maxing?

 

Your whole diarretic blob above that said nothing against what I was trying to say for casual players and helping them.

 

Basically any AT can be made to be good, and if someone wants to learn that me and my group teach them.  But its not required, I have people that are fine not being OP and they play with us often, and dont mind the majority of us being built to the 9s.

 

Some people do want to learn and it end up being a fun part of the game for them - as I said it is a mini game.

 

It hs nothing to do with power creep, those same builds get tested in conditions like the ones that have the resistance and incarnate level content.

 

How do I know this because I tried tanking the nightstar mission with my decked out elec storm troller and mob 1 was a team wipe with me first - they overwhelmed my defenses so fast i couldnt react.

 

With a tank that wouldnt have happened, unless they werent built right.

 

There just needs to be more content like this.

 

So no just because there can be any AT at the soft cap doesnt mean that is against the game design or power creep, and boy inside could have used a bubbler on that mission.

 

And seriously take your be damned comment and stow that somewhere, you can ask anyone that knows me in game, I will bleed my life force dry to help someone in game if I can.  You are way off on that.  I described what is fun for me, and there isnt a thing wrong with that.

 

If anything you are in the minority here and trying to be an authoritarian for telling everyone else how you think the game should be played.

It's funny how apparently it's just fine for you to share a strong opinion or criticism about someone's posts and thus is perfectly within reason but the moment someone else shares a strong opinion or criticism about your posts, it's suddenly some aberration of logic or morals that needs to be shoved in a cave and walled up or some crap.

 

Listen, if you can't take other people with strong opinions, maybe you should be the one to take your damned comments and stow them.  Or perhaps you can put on your big boy pants and put your personal fee-fees aside for a change and understand no one's individual feelings need to be taken into consideration for the whole here, including my own.

 

Arguments about fun are purely subjective.  The obvious argument is to take everyone's fun into consideration rather than to dismiss them.  Looking into multiple facets of gameplay and progression, I'm merely looking at means to accommodate aspects of the game mostly marginalized.  Even min/maxing in and of itself is somewhat marginalized because there is no content for it and likely there won't ever be.

[Galaxy Brain]

@Luminara, real quick: while yes, people can opt to fill the gaps with ToHit and Damage Debuffs, both of those are subject t oPurple Patch harder than how personal defenses interact with purple patch threats.

[Naraka]

20 minutes ago, Luminara said:

 

There aren't enough relevant and worthwhile power choices to necessitate the kind of limitation you envision.  Everyone has 24 power selections by level 50.  Half of those are frequently used.  Half of the remainder are occasional or emergency options.  The last six are "I had to pick something".  There are simply too many non-viable options available and little reason not to use them to obtain set bonuses.  And of the first half, it's rare that any are so limited in slotting that they can't be slotted differently to achieve the same goal because set bonuses were widely spread across sets for all types of powers.

 

There are no real sacrifices, beyond "Aw, I wanted to use that once per mission power once per mission.  Oh, well, I'll take this other power instead and slot it for a Defense set bonus... and look a little less awesome.  Woe is me."  And the tactical variance you imagine occurring, refer to the previous sentence.

 

 

Do you honestly believe it wasn't always prevalent, or easy?  My TA/Dark hit the Ranged soft cap after three power usages on the original servers (only two of which caused aggro, with fast animations), and I only had 17% Ranged Defense.  And I built for massive +Recharge, not Defense.  That 17% Defense was unplanned happenstance.  And this was before ATOs and Winter IOs.  No mules for Defense bonuses, no crazy frankenslotting to squeeze a little more +Defense in.

 

Soft-capping has always been possible for anyone who understood the mechanics of the game.  Soft-capping was a given once IO sets were introduced, even if Defense bonuses had been flagged as Unique and non-stacking.  Why is it suddenly worthy of attention now?  And how can anyone believe the best solution is nerfing IOs, in light of the above facts?

Okay, well soft cap with 3 powers with Sonic/Fire or Grav/Energy or Demons/Pain.

 

Again, like I said, the issue isn't that one can "soft cap" incoming hits, it's the prevalence within IOs.  Coupled with other aspects like global recharge etc, it does become an issue with trying to balance various aspects of the game.  It's not that you can, it's how easy it is.  How fast it is.  Aspects of a game that require you to play it become marginalized.  But I'll stand corrected if CoX is now moreso supposed to be *Second Life but limited customization "hero" larping rather than a game.  From the perspective of the game being a game, balance helps make that game fun in various respects to include progression, learning curve, social aspects and such.

 

As for soft-capping always being possible, those are features tied to certain powers.  Basically, that is a feature of a set like SR or Dark Miasma that are now marginalized moreso than other aspects and features.  Why is it worthy of attention now?  I mean, if you want to pretend people weren't talking about it up until today or even HC...

 

*I actually never played Second Life but I always assumed it wasn't an actual game, moreso a creative online sandbox where the participants create the rules.

Edited May 18, 2020 by Naraka

[Crysis]

1 hour ago, Pleonast said:

Actually, I propose increasing the max notoriety level adjustment without changing the purple patch. No one would have to play at +5 or higher. And if they did, they'd suffer the effects of the purple patch. Relatively little coding work for vastly harder play as an option.

Interesting, but again in the vein of "it's all a system" I can't see this viably having the desired effect unless they were to also roll back ED, allowing people to stack enough +TOHIT and +DMG to actually do anything beyond +4's.  

 

And THAT topic has come up pretty frequently, usually with a general consensus that the game pre-ED, pre-GDN, pre-Purple Patch (and maybe even pre-Aggro nerfs) was just hilariously EASIER not harder.  Again, I go back to my perma-MOG Regenner's who literally ignored their entire secondary and just focused on 6-slotted Hasten and Moment of Glory.  

 

Most recent thread on it I recall....but there's dozens of them on these forums already.

 

 

[golstat2003]

IOs are fine. Add more options for those that want to play difficult content. (Of which i bet you'd find very few if you didn't increase the rewards for doing so, as @Galaxy Brainalluded to earlier.)

 

EDIT: This ancient free game isn't dark souls. And it never will be.

Edited May 18, 2020 by golstat2003

[Infinitum]

57 minutes ago, Naraka said:

It's funny how apparently it's just fine for you to share a strong opinion or criticism about someone's posts and thus is perfectly within reason but the moment someone else shares a strong opinion or criticism about your posts, it's suddenly some aberration of logic or morals that needs to be shoved in a cave and walled up or some crap.

 

Listen, if you can't take other people with strong opinions, maybe you should be the one to take your damned comments and stow them.  Or perhaps you can put on your big boy pants and put your personal fee-fees aside for a change and understand no one's individual feelings need to be taken into consideration for the whole here, including my own.

 

Arguments about fun are purely subjective.  The obvious argument is to take everyone's fun into consideration rather than to dismiss them.  Looking into multiple facets of gameplay and progression, I'm merely looking at means to accommodate aspects of the game mostly marginalized.  Even min/maxing in and of itself is somewhat marginalized because there is no content for it and likely there won't ever be.

I'm not the one that has to take anything, burden of proof is on you nerfherders.  I have fun every night.  So does everyone I know.  Not to mention you are the only one throwing the damn this damn that daggers my way.  Thats you partner.  And thats after most of us took issue with your idiotic auggestions to nerf set bonuses to make 100% of our builds irrelevant. You think you wont get a reaction taking issue with that?  You need to look up moron in the dictionary if you think otherwise.

 

Could certain things be tweaked better for our liking?  Sure but not sweeping a years worth of building under the rug so someone in the minority can feel better - also when it's not a valid concern with tons of options to attain what the concern is in the first place.

 

And you better expect a harsh reaction when you damn my motivations when

 

1 you don't know me

and

2 You don't know how many people I have helped and continue to try to help to build past perceived limitations, or just to help people with ordinary content.

 

I have fun by being the best I can be - min maxing and helping others in a variety of ways and leading them on hard content.  I've probably only missed 7 days since last may for various reasons, and also probably have one of the most knowledgeable and laid back/friendly SGs on Excelsior.

 

All you are doing is advocating throwing excellence out the window creating a community of co dependence that requires certain builds just to keep moving forward.

 

Hard pass, no thank you, and don't let the door hit you.

Edited May 18, 2020 by Infinitum

[Infinitum]

55 minutes ago, Naraka said:

Even min/maxing in and of itself is somewhat marginalized because there is no content for it and likely there won't ever be.

yes there is, you may need to check your lazy meter to see if you havent sought it out hard enough.

[Naraka]

4 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

I'm not the one that has to take anything, burden of proof is on you nerfherders. 

Burden of proof and discussions of nerfs not withstanding, I've got no idea how any of that is relevant to holding a mature conversation.

 

6 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

1 you don't know me

and

2 You don't know how many people I have helped and continue to try to help to build past perceived limitations, or just to help people with ordinary content.

For 1: considering how you reply to posts online, let's keep it that way.

For 2: I have no idea why you'd think I care.  Maybe if you were an EMT or a teacher or even the cashier who checked my groceries last week, I'd care about your contributions to the welfare of others.  But this is a *GAME* lol.  To be frank, I don't give a fuck about your in-game contributions...unless, I dunno, you worked on the code or server security or some such.

 

Perhaps you're a sufferer of delusions of grandeur? I'm not belittling your in-game community but to think any of what you just posted has any gravity in this discussion is perplexing.

[Crysis]

2 hours ago, Golden Azrael said:

 

Perhaps that 'elite' mode should be focused in Kalista with mobs, general mission content, TFs etc.  Surprise AV attacks on the street...Setting the 'Elite' challenge in mobs, AVs, missions and spawn attacks for those with the incarnate and IO set builds.  A really dangerous zone in the way Bricks would be if you went there as a Talos level hero.

You basically just described Recluse Victory minus the PVP elements.  Yet another empty zone.

 

Badgers would come on boards barking about how difficult it is to get the badges in that zone.  Someone from the group would come on here with a suggestion about how to have the ability to interact with objects in that zone without breaking stealth or while Phase Shift is running etc etc etc.

 

At this point I think we have to look at the fact that difficult content was developed and put in place and all that work was pretty much wasted on the overwhelming majority of the player base.  Casual wins.