Are Player Defenses too high

[Hardboiled Hero]

4 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Not if You are council stomping, or if you are stacking debuffs and damage with an all debuffer team.  Neither of those scenarios are applicable to defense though.

  To me, this is actually very applicable to defense.. if a character never needs to rely on their defense stat because they either kill things so fast, or control things so well, or whatever.. those characters still have good defenses.

 

  Perhaps it's been a bit confusing, but when I was asking these questions I didn't mean to dwell on Defense stat, nor do I think that having a general change in defense means changing survivability or difficulty, should those changes involve both targeted and seriously thought out "buffs" and equally target and thought out "nerfs".

 

  I made this poll when I realized another discussion I was having I was afraid to make a suggestion because, my assumption was that many people are here for a sense of nostalgia and, even if they think something in the game is unbalanced, they may not want it changed.  But I don't like to have my discussions be guided by nothing but assumptions and mysticism, so I figured I'd just ask people for their opinions.  The results here aren't meant to cause anything to happen in game, but are only meant to inform discussions that people (including myself) might be having here on the forums.

 

 So that everyone knows,  I've helped in the design of tabletop games before (technically I've made some games myself, but never sold those), but I know nothing about computer programming.  I have no relationship to the Homecoming team, so I don't really know how they would feel about any changes, big or otherwise..  I only hope that if any of them decide to read this thread they'll just find the discussion to be pleasant and enlightening..  However they aren't the target audience.. forumites are the target audience.

 

  And once again, Thank you to everyone who's participating.

[Crysis]

I don't think it's a nostalgia concern.  Although I'd agree that MOST forum contributors here are/were active in the Live days.  But there was a time before the Global Defense Nerf and Enhancement Diversification when Defense was even HIGHER than it is now.  Those higher values, coupled with zero aggro limits, allowed Tankers and Scrappers to herd the entire map for a waiting Kinetic Defender to Fulcrum Shift and Nuke.  Repeatedly.  

 

I don't want to return to THAT level of silly OP Defense.  I didn't want the GDN or ED to happen but it did years ago and the IO mechanism has allowed us to have a reasonable return to some semblance of Defense softcapping.  

 

The question then becomes not about Defense levels and relative ease to achieve softcapping, but rather what is "reasonable" Defense for each AT?  And at what level?  The Devs said at the time of GDN and ED changes that they considered the 25+ game to be the "high levels" and balanced around it.  Prior to 25, Defense looks and behaves very differently.  Once you start getting into Def Debuff critters, softcapped defenses are simply not enough and THAT is where outside +DEF buffs (or -TOHIT debuffs vs Critters) start to come into play.  My softcapped S/L/E and Ranged Blaster at level 48 may as well not even HAVE defenses when I'm running like -38% Def after a swarm of Arachnos has DefDebuffed me.  

 

[Infinitum]

13 minutes ago, Hardboiled Hero said:

  To me, this is actually very applicable to defense.. if a character never needs to rely on their defense stat because they either kill things so fast, or control things so well, or whatever.. those characters still have good defenses.

 

  Perhaps it's been a bit confusing, but when I was asking these questions I didn't mean to dwell on Defense stat, nor do I think that having a general change in defense means changing survivability or difficulty, should those changes involve both targeted and seriously thought out "buffs" and equally target and thought out "nerfs".

 

  I made this poll when I realized another discussion I was having I was afraid to make a suggestion because, my assumption was that many people are here for a sense of nostalgia and, even if they think something in the game is unbalanced, they may not want it changed.  But I don't like to have my discussions be guided by nothing but assumptions and mysticism, so I figured I'd just ask people for their opinions.  The results here aren't meant to cause anything to happen in game, but are only meant to inform discussions that people (including myself) might be having here on the forums.

 

 So that everyone knows,  I've helped in the design of tabletop games before (technically I've made some games myself, but never sold those), but I know nothing about computer programming.  I have no relationship to the Homecoming team, so I don't really know how they would feel about any changes, big or otherwise..  I only hope that if any of them decide to read this thread they'll just find the discussion to be pleasant and enlightening..  However they aren't the target audience.. forumites are the target audience.

 

  And once again, Thank you to everyone who's participating.

So basically its semantics but we are talking all forms of mitigation, attack speed and severity, defense stat, resistance stat, regen etc

 

Right?

[Luminara]

4 hours ago, Naraka said:

scrolling back to @Luminara's points about being able to soft cap with certain builds, I feel that aspects of the game like a character with SR or a Dark Miasma or Dark Affinity, being able to 'not get hit' is a feature of that set/power combination and are wholly different from combinations that might be able to amass some def with pools/IO sets.

 

I wasn't referring to primaries which floor critter hit chance by design.  I was referring to the combinations of primaries, secondaries, pools and APPs/PPPs which grant every AT the opportunity to soft-cap Defense through concerted passive and active manipulation of different sections of the critter hit chance equation.

 

Trick Arrows is most definitely not, by any definition, a set which was designed with "not get hit" in mind.  But it was one of the tools I used to do just that, rebalance the critter hit chance equation in my favor, "not get hit".  I didn't even intend to build toward soft-capping, it just happened.  My initial goal was the same as most TA fans at that time, reducing OSA's recharge as much as possible.  Coincidentally, that goal reduced TT and Nightfall's recharge times to their animation times and initiated, on my part, a deeper examination of the game's mechanics and a reassessment of my build and goals, which led to a greater comprehension of the possibilities the developers freely gave to us in regard to our play style and character concept choices.

 

Extreme ToHit Debuff values aren't necessary.  I didn't slot TT or Nightfall for -ToHit, I slotted them with damage procs, and even optimally slotted, Flash Arrow has never been a particularly strong debuff on its own, but in concert with a seemingly small amount of +Def, these sources add up to... soft-capped Defense.

 

Stacking of -ToHit, from multiple sources or rapid recharge of a couple of self-stacking sources, is all that is necessary to manipulate part of the equation, and it is, by no means, difficult to achieve, nor even particularly restricted.  Every AT, with the exception of Kheldians and Arachnos Soldiers (who have their own unique mechanics and play style, and are tank-mages in their own right when played well), has at least one primary or secondary with ToHit Debuffs (or, in rare cases, Accuracy Debuffs).  Almost all of the ATs have two or more primaries or secondaries with ToHit Debuffs, which opens up dozens of potential combinations per AT, and in almost every case, there's also either an APP or PPP which offers more options for -ToHit (defenders and corruptors being the exception, and they already have the widest variety of primaries and secondaries with -ToHit), or fills that hole in the tool kit.  Even Arachnos Soldiers are given two AoE ToHit/Accuracy Debuffs (one of each) in PPPs (specifically, Soul Mastery).  That's all it takes, if you have sufficient +Recharge, just a couple of debuffing attacks.

 

And that +Recharge?  Despite significant controversy over nearly a decade, they didn't nerf Hasten to the degree some people feared (and others hoped).  They didn't flag it to ignore +Recharge.  They didn't increase the recharge time to the point that it couldn't be made perma.  No, in fact, not only did they allow us to continue using it as a a perma power, they dumped insane amounts of +Recharge in IO set bonuses, and in multi-aspect IOs themselves (Acc/Dam/Rech, as an example, which, when used with other multi-aspect enhancements, allows players to maximally enhance powers using fewer slots), and in IOs like LotG Def/+Rech... which stacks, rather than being unique (could they have made this +Def/-ToHit/+Rech interaction any more obvious without putting it on billboards in the game?), making it even easier to achieve perma-Hasten, or skip Hasten entirely and still gain the benefits of the same level of global +Recharge.  They even made a proc which granted near-Hasten +Recharge just for KB powers, and, even more indicative of the design philosophy behind the game, included that proc when they refactored the way procs triggered, so it could be reliably used (when they redesigned the PPM math).  Oh, and they tacked on Incarnate Abilities which enhance global recharge.  And bypass part of ED.  Intentional, knowing, deliberate design choices.

 

The other part of the equation, Defense, never required IO sets, either.  Yes, I absolutely agree that they do make it easier to obtain, but I was playing with an absurdly low Defense total, easily achievable by melee ATs, and eventually achievable by squishies, without IO sets, because it was given to squishies in pools and APPs/PPPs in sufficient cumulative quantities to effectively layer with -ToHit.  The developers knowingly and deliberately gave everyone access to not-insignificant (when viewed from this perspective) amounts of +Defense (typically Smashing/Lethal, which also, not by coincidence, happen to be the most common critter damage types) in the *PPs, just like they gave (almost... sorry, Kheldians) everyone access to -ToHit/Acc.  They didn't lock Defense into melee ATs, or give squishies a lower soft cap, they laid it out on a silver platter and presented it to us with a smile.  That didn't come about months or weeks before sunset, either, it was very, very early on, when APPs were created and released, and expanded upon in the design of PPPs, and still further when *PPs were proliferated.

 

Further exploration of this from a design perspective reminds us that critter spawns reflect AoE target limits, in the number of critters spawned, the proximity to one another within a spawn and the diameter of the spawned group.  Spawns almost never contain more critters than can be hit with an AoE (16 target limit).  Spawns almost always consist of all critters standing within a specifically definable area, which is, concurrently, almost always within the radius limits of most AoEs.  And individual critters within spawns are almost always generated in close proximity to one another, in order to enable efficient and effective use of cones and AoEs.  These design choices were intentional, and are they lay a foundation for soft-capping through manipulation of the critter hit chance equation.

 

Another design aspect is the self-stacking nature of most powers with a ToHit Debuff component.  While there are limits, primarily the unenhanceable durations of the debuff, these powers were intentionally allowed to self-stack.  Consequently, one does not need five or six or nine powers with -ToHit to floor critter hit chances, or a single power with -25% ToHit, it can be achieved with as few as two with sufficient +Recharge.  By design, the game allows, even encourages, players to stack appreciable percentages of -ToHit before a spawn can retaliate to any significant degree (defeat the player), simply by attacking or debuffing... which, again, by design, is how we play this game.  Pew pew, stab stab, win win.

 

Continuing with the design analysis, there's powerset and APP/PPP proliferation and expansion.  ToHit debuffs were, early in the life of the game, generally restricted in availability to Dark * scrappers and specific defenders/controllers/blasters, but with powerset proliferation, that availability broadened significantly.  Not only were powersets with -ToHit given to ATs which lacked them, but more -ToHit was offered in the APPs and PPPs, and still more when access to those was expanded.

 

Typed Defense Buffs were given similar treatment.  Whereas originally, pre-I3, one had to play a melee AT or a specialized squishie (FF defenders and controllers, for instance) to acquire viable +Def, the options were significantly expanded, several times.  Again, with the exception of Kheldians, no ATs were excluded from access to Defense in either primaries, secondaries or *PPs, and the developers explicitly stated that this was intentional.

 

At any point over the course of 9 years, the developers could have made adjustments to hit check calculations or stacking mechanics or recharge, to curb layered soft-capping, or restrict that approach to specific powersets, or define a harder limit to how much each mechanic could be manipulated.  Instead, they verified the math for us and gave us ever-increasing ways to manipulate it.

 

And, as @macskull mentioned, IO set Defense bonuses were even buffed, with the developers going so far as to spoon-feed players extra positional Defense to complement the typed Defense in the bonuses, and vice versa.  That wasn't a typo in one field of a spreadsheet, they actually went into the set bonus tables and manually changed dozens of entries, a deliberate action intended to increase general availability of Defense for players, and to make Defense as a mechanic more effective and even less constricted.

 

None of this was accidental, or the result of multiple oversights.  If this wasn't actively mapped out as one of the design parameters before I3 was released, it was adopted as the direction the developers wanted to take the game toward very soon thereafter.  Every design choice they made over the years makes that evident.  Every AT has access to +Defense, without IOs, and in sufficient quantity to layer with -ToHit to effectively soft-cap (once again, except Kheldians).  Every AT has access to -ToHit (and again, Kheldians), with at least one primary and one secondary powerset which uses it, as well as in APPs/PPPs, giving players a very, very wide array of potential combinations (hundreds) to fulfill the design goal of allowed soft-capping without restricting it to rare or niche builds, or builds which force players to make unpalatable choices.  And everyone has access to nearly capped +Recharge, without the need to sacrifice anything.

 

But what of those sacrifices we "have" to make to accomplish this?  Having to give up a choice *PP, or skip some primary/secondary powers in favor of pool powers, or deal with fewer slots to go around, or decide whether a character concept is compatible with layered soft-capping?  Some of those sacrifices aren't actually sacrifices.  Frankly, I have yet to see a powerset with 9 perfect powers, primary or secondary.  Let's be honest, some of them are just garbage.  Damage is too low, or the status effect is of too limited utility, or the animation time is too long, or the penalty for using the power is too high, or the power is just too situational to justify taking or keeping, etc.  We're not giving anything up by skipping some primaries and/or secondaries, and we have enough power selections by level 50 to justify adding a bit of +Def or -ToHit.  Heck, I my soft-capped "proc monster" TA/Dark still had all of the Fitness pool as selections.  I never respeced her to change them to inherents and free up the power selections.  And slots are abundant with IO sets and their multi-aspect IOs.  So, realistically, we're only talking about conceptual limitations, and I have little doubt that our few thousand current Co* players can find concepts for a few million characters among the hundreds of potential choices of +Def/-ToHit combinations available.

 

And there are hundreds combinations across the ATs, multiplied still further by *PP options, which accomplish this.  Soft-capping isn't something restricted to a handful of primary/secondary combinations available to specific ATs within narrow parameters, such as "only melee ATs", or "only Rad/FF/Dark squishies", it is widely available through the fundamental pairing of primary/secondary powersets and the APP/PPP "fill the gaps" design.  This isn't the result of little quirks which couldn't be controlled, or bugs in power interactions, or developer design mistakes, it was intentional.  They did this purposefully, built it into the game from the beginning.

 

So, no, my point wasn't that specific combinations within specific ATs have always been capable of "not get hit" play, it was that there are sufficient options in both primaries and secondaries, not one or the other, for all ATs, which open up vastly more potential for players and removes numerous concept-oriented restrictions.  Selecting a primary or secondary with -ToHit and tacking on +Def from an APP/PPP, or selecting a primary or secondary with +Def and coupling it with an APP/PPP with -ToHit (or, in a rare few cases, -Acc), and minor supplementation with pools to round out +Def totals, is achievable to everyone (except Kheldians, as noted previously), is capable of reaching soft-capped levels (presuming the player foregoes IO set Defense bonuses), and is not unduly restrictive in either character concept or actual mechanics.

 

So reducing, restricting or even outright removing IO set Defense bonuses wouldn't make one bit of difference.  We've had what they amount to since I3.  What those bonuses have done is remove the last minor restriction to reaching the soft cap, that of character concept, so no-one has to feel "forced" to select a combination of primary/secondary/*PP which mate +Def with -ToHit.  And all of that is ignoring the ridiculous ease of completely and utterly sidestepping critter hit checks via hard controls and knockback, which are both far more prevalent and egregious "abuses" of the game.

 

As long as +Def, -ToHit and +Rech are so freely available, the critter hit equation is nothing more than another guide to character construction, and IO set Defense bonuses are merely one ICBM in the silo.  This is the game.  This is what was intended.  This is by design.

[Hardboiled Hero]

5 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

So basically its semantics but we are talking all forms of mitigation, attack speed and severity, defense stat, resistance stat, regen etc

 

Right?

Yes, which Is why I mentioned in the first post that I know the answer would be very nuanced.. to high in some cases, not enough in others, etc.

[Infinitum]

37 minutes ago, Hardboiled Hero said:

Yes, which Is why I mentioned in the first post that I know the answer would be very nuanced.. to high in some cases, not enough in others, etc.

Really depends on what you are fighting,

 

Take Elec armor for instance.  Unkillable against 90% of the game.

 

Then you meet the hydra dimension, if you are set to +4 its going to be rough.  On that mission im really grateful to have support.

 

Everything has a weakness, some more than others by design.

 

Some people avoid threatening content, some don't.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Infinitum

[Reiska]

I see no reason to change the original devs' paradigm that the game is balanced around the exclusive usage of SO enhancements and that the only content that is balanced around the use of incarnate powers is the content that requires incarnate powers.

 

If you think heavy IO slotting makes the game too easy, don't do it.  Run your characters with SOs only.

If you think incarnate powers make the game too easy, unslot your incarnate powers when you're not running content that requires them.

[Peacemoon]

2 hours ago, Doomguide2005 said:

My own overall impression is the Live devs were headed much more down the adjust things foe side not player side as a way to counter growing player strength.  They gave us foes who across the board who had their To Hit base buffed, which led to the I-cap.  They gave us foes who  spawned much more scattered (gold side), etc., etc.. Found it amusing to see arcs where the foes use Earth powers (defdebuff) and sonic attacks paired up (resistance debuffs).   I remember watching tanks and scrappers (rather brutes and others) a long time back getting shredded redside when they first encountered a new enemy ... wailers who debuffed the living %&$#@% out of their resistance based mitigation.   I'm guessing we have new foes with new 'stuff' coming our way ... not nerfs to player powers and abilities particularly across the board changes. 

Very good point, and some of the old factions could do with a bit of retooling. Do the Crey scientists and medics even have an attack?! Even the Skulls or Trolls are more dangerous then them. (Although Crey is more balanced around super duper bosses, but still).

 

I remember doing a Portal Corps Family mission at 50. I thought “this will be easy, I’ll up the diff to max”. Well turned out they’d stolen some resistance equipment and 1 Heavy Gunner would kill me in seconds. It was a bit of a wake up.

 

There is even a story arc in Dark Astoria about the Malta Group seeking to upgrade their technology to match the newer factions. Nanotechnology I think it was? So that was probably on the cards to make them scary again. 
 

Or look at the Incarnate Banished Pantheon. They can pose a pretty good challenge with all their debuffs. 
 

Not everything needs to be as tough as them, but maybe the Council could use a little upgrade.

[Coyote]

2 hours ago, Infinitum said:

I dont think you do balance all factions, because this is primarily an endgame issue not a leveling issue.

 

Yeah, I missed clarifying that... I meant, all factions that you fight at 40+, maybe a bit in the 30s but not much (frankly, the Night Ward factions should be 40+ content as they're overboosted for the 30s). Certainly there's no need to boost up Vahzilok or Skulls, it's not like you can overtune a character at level 15.

[Peacemoon]

1 minute ago, Coyote said:

 

Yeah, I missed clarifying that... I meant, all factions that you fight at 40+, maybe a bit in the 30s but not much (frankly, the Night Ward factions should be 40+ content as they're overboosted for the 30s). Certainly there's no need to boost up Vahzilok or Skulls, it's not like you can overtune a character at level 15.

Night Ward is deadly. So many of their enemies can summon pets, it’s like fighting some crazy AE mission. Plus I hate the arcane spells and other things where you can’t see what your fighting, and some tiny floating stick is actually a boss that just did massive damage. Worst enemies ever!

 

I think Crey and Sky Raiders could use a bit of love but otherwise yes more the 40+ factions. Pretty sure 40+Council is the same as the level 25 version? Just vampyrs, wolves and mini gun men?  Maybe they should have more warshade powers?
I was fighting the Paragon Police a few weeks back, some was struck by how powerful they were, I had to adjust my tactics a bit, but that was fun. We don’t get to fight them much as a Heroes, obviously, but they had some great Peacebringer representation! Probably more representation of Kheldians in that mission then the rest of the game combined! 🤣

[Coyote]

I do have one BIG problem with the issue of "let's buff content instead of nerfing characters".

Yes, it makes players happy. No worries about

"You're insulting me by trying to break my character"

"Quit nerfherding and just play your character"

"My character is broken, I'm quitting"

etc.

 

But you know what? When you target nerfs to top-end builds, you can make precise changes. Not with 100% accuracy, granted, since you're making assumptions about how players will respond with redesigning characters, but you do have a great degree of control.

 

When, instead, you do what people LIKE TO SEE, which is add more mobs to weak factions... like someone with Link Minds to Carnies (and, boy, is that ever so fitting)... well, you achieve your goal in making things more challenging for top-end capped Defense builds. You also make things harder for weak builds. Granted, not by as much... mobs going from 5% to 15% chance to hit is a lot bigger change than going from 30 to 35%. But you're still affecting the low and mid-level builds also. This is really why I prefer nerfs, as a game designer... although I understand that, politically speaking, in a MMO it's always easier to stealth buff the characters by buffing the mobs, than to overtly nerf characters even if only 2% of the characters would be affected. You just have more control over who gets hit when you swing a nerf bat, than when you buff the mobs and send them out to kill people... you might have hapless noobs get curb-stomped by the Awakened.

 

I mean, can you imagine sending a novice player without a very strong build at +1/x4 against Awakened? God help them.

[Coyote]

1 minute ago, Peacemoon said:

Plus I hate the arcane spells and other things where you can’t see what your fighting, and some tiny floating stick is actually a boss that just did massive damage. Worst enemies ever!

 

Agreed. I mainly play Doms and Controllers, and having no idea who is Held, who is Confused, Stunned, etc, is just a nightmare. I throw out random controls in random directions and hope I'm not Holding the spell that I just Stunned, who I should have left alone because it's actually Confused and wants to heal me 😄

[Peacemoon]

8 minutes ago, Coyote said:

 

Agreed. I mainly play Doms and Controllers, and having no idea who is Held, who is Confused, Stunned, etc, is just a nightmare. I throw out random controls in random directions and hope I'm not Holding the spell that I just Stunned, who I should have left alone because it's actually Confused and wants to heal me 😄

Yes those ruddy ambushes in the defend the mansion mission.. doing it solo on my Dark controller having only just recently returned to the game. Completely hit me sideways. Funny note, on that mission if you release you get rezzed around the side of the mansion, and the ambushes chase you there. So I ended up getting corpse camped by a bunch of floating sticks and other spells! I had to rezz, attack and die about 6 or 7 times until eventually I could rezz without being instantly gibbed!

Some of these “SURPRISE! AMBUSH!” Are not very forgiving for characters with not much defences - and at this point I was only doing basic IOs and no set bonuses until max level. Sort of middle of the road, I thought. But given I’m an experienced player, maybe I was a bit cocky having it set to x3 players...

Edited May 19, 2020 by Peacemoon

[Hardboiled Hero]

One of the fantastic things about CoX was that it already took into account how many players were going into a mission and what their level was.. at least as much as it could.  This is part of the reason that I don't think changes would necessarily effect survivability/difficulty, because those are already alterable in the game.

[Naraka]

7 hours ago, Infinitum said:

No, I did, because the truth is important.  And I wanted you to understand I'm not pushing you - because I missed the part where you said that first.

 

That would be something silly to lie about on a message board.

But you are trying to.  You certainly did edit your post and add the quoted part I mentioned.  I mean, you can't hide the fact you edit a post, you can only lie about what you edited.

[Infinitum]

Just now, Naraka said:

But you are trying to.  You certainly did edit your post and add the quoted part I mentioned.  I mean, you can't hide the fact you edit a post, you can only lie about what you edited.

But im not hiding it, and I'm not lying about it.

 

I think I freely admitted it.

 

And no im not trying to goad you on.  Im just letting you vent still, you will stop when you get tired of it I suppose.

[Infinitum]

26 minutes ago, Coyote said:

You also make things harder for weak builds. Granted, not by as much... mobs going from 5% to 15% chance to hit is a lot bigger change than going from 30 to 35%. But you're still affecting the low and mid-level builds also. This is really why I prefer nerfs, as a game designer...

Thats what the difficulty slider is for.

 

If its too hard turn it down.

[Doomguide2005]

19 minutes ago, Coyote said:

I do have one BIG problem with the issue of "let's buff content instead of nerfing characters".

Yes, it makes players happy. No worries about

"You're insulting me by trying to break my character"

"Quit nerfherding and just play your character"

"My character is broken, I'm quitting"

etc.

 

But you know what? When you target nerfs to top-end builds, you can make precise changes. Not with 100% accuracy, granted, since you're making assumptions about how players will respond with redesigning characters, but you do have a great degree of control.

 

When, instead, you do what people LIKE TO SEE, which is add more mobs to weak factions... like someone with Link Minds to Carnies (and, boy, is that ever so fitting)... well, you achieve your goal in making things more challenging for top-end capped Defense builds. You also make things harder for weak builds. Granted, not by as much... mobs going from 5% to 15% chance to hit is a lot bigger change than going from 30 to 35%. But you're still affecting the low and mid-level builds also. This is really why I prefer nerfs, as a game designer... although I understand that, politically speaking, in a MMO it's always easier to stealth buff the characters by buffing the mobs, than to overtly nerf characters even if only 2% of the characters would be affected. You just have more control over who gets hit when you swing a nerf bat, than when you buff the mobs and send them out to kill people... you might have hapless noobs get curb-stomped by the Awakened.

 

I mean, can you imagine sending a novice player without a very strong build at +1/x4 against Awakened? God help them.

Yes this is definitely a large component in the overall picture.  There is a absolutely huge spread of character/player capabilities, especially by the time you reach the endgame.  Trying to design content for such a broad range of capabilities is probably close to impossible if not impossible.  You'll tend to either slaughter or bore a chunk of the player base at one end or the other.  There's even a fair spread among IO/Incarnate builds at 50 owing to build expertise, player preferences and even things as simple as how finished the current high end build is for a particular player.  By default if the story arc(s) are intended for everyone to be capable of completing the Devs are kind of stuck to a certain max difficulty or it becomes a sort of gate in itself.

[Naraka]

2 hours ago, Luminara said:

I wasn't referring to primaries which floor critter hit chance by design.  I was referring to the combinations of primaries, secondaries, pools and APPs/PPPs which grant every AT the opportunity to soft-cap Defense through concerted passive and active manipulation of different sections of the critter hit chance equation.

 

Trick Arrows is most definitely not, by any definition, a set which was designed with "not get hit" in mind.  But it was one of the tools I used to do just that, rebalance the critter hit chance equation in my favor, "not get hit".  I didn't even intend to build toward soft-capping, it just happened.  My initial goal was the same as most TA fans at that time, reducing OSA's recharge as much as possible.  Coincidentally, that goal reduced TT and Nightfall's recharge times to their animation times and initiated, on my part, a deeper examination of the game's mechanics and a reassessment of my build and goals, which led to a greater comprehension of the possibilities the developers freely gave to us in regard to our play style and character concept choices.

Well your statement isn't in disagreement here with mine.  "not get hit" doesn't = "never get hit" or "get hit 5% of the time" when I say it's a feature.  Any set with some amount of ToHit debuffing and/or defense is kind of getting the benefit of "not getting hit" as a feature of those powers.  You say you're not referring to primaries which floor hit chance but you're quoting powers that lower it which is technically the same thing I'm talking about when I say it's a "feature".  Players taking it to the extreme isn't off the table and the amount of effort necessary to push it to the absolute extreme is going to be the point of contention.

 

14 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

And no im not trying to goad you on.  Im just letting you vent still, you will stop when you get tired of it I suppose.

So now you're admitting to gaslighting people?  That seems pretty malevolent for someone who's motivated to help people.  Or do you think you're helping me?  Gaslighting is pretty rude, you know.

[Infinitum]

6 minutes ago, Doomguide2005 said:

By default if the story arc(s) are intended for everyone to be capable of completing the Devs are kind of stuck to a certain max difficulty or it becomes a sort of gate in itself.

That's where adding a mode - Elite Mode would come in to play.

[Infinitum]

4 minutes ago, Naraka said:

So now you're admitting to gaslighting people?  That seems pretty malevolent for someone who's motivated to help people.  Or do you think you're helping me?  Gaslighting is pretty rude, you know

Nope, I'm still just sitting here watching you rant at the wind.

 

I think your forum tone translater may be broken.

 

If you are reading my posts to Samuel l Jackson, that is incorrect.

 

Substitute that for Jerry Seinfeld and that would be more accurate.

 

Ie: I'm letting it go - chalking it up to mutual differences and personality conflicts (not that there's anything wrong with that), so should you.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Infinitum

[Doomguide2005]

10 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

That's where adding a mode - Elite Mode would come in to play.

Yes making it harder isn't really the issue. That's relatively easy to do.  It's not making it too hard for other end of the spectrum to handle or get frustrated trying to complete, something you want everyone to be able to complete.  Things like elite mode and the difficulty slider only go so far and the wider or broader that gap gets the harder it is to design for (or you end up with ultra elite mode).  For example designing missions to unlock 'things' such as an alpha slot.

[Infinitum]

Just now, Doomguide2005 said:

Yes making it harder isn't really the issue. That's relatively easy to do.  It's not making it too hard for other end of the spectrum to handle or get frustrated trying to complete, something you want everyone to be able to complete.  Things like elite mode and the difficulty slider only go so far and the wider or broader that gap gets the harder it is to design for (or you end up with ultra elite mode).  For example designing missions to unlock 'things' such as an alpha slot.

Elite mode would spawn AV and EB with debuffs and exotic damage.

 

What gets every one involved, what damages the unkillable?  Exotic damage, debuffs etc.  That alone would make empaths a tanks best friend again in that mode.

 

Get tired of that.... Switch back to regular mode as it is now?

[Naraka]

19 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Nope, I'm still just sitting here watching you rant at the wind.

But I'm not ranting.  I'm just saying what you're doing while you tell me you're not doing it.

 

20 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Ie: I'm letting it go - chalking it up to mutual differences and personality conflicts (not that there's anything wrong with that), so should you.

I mean...yeah, that is how your previous post ended until you edited it.

[Doomguide2005]

28 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Elite mode would spawn AV and EB with debuffs and exotic damage.

 

What gets every one involved, what damages the unkillable?  Exotic damage, debuffs etc.  That alone would make empaths a tanks best friend again in that mode.

 

Get tired of that.... Switch back to regular mode as it is now?

Yeah I don't disagree.  Going to think on it more as I don't know if I'm conveying well what I mean currently.   Ultimately the broader the gap between -1/×1 and +4/×8 builds and players the more resources (as in Dev/design time) involved to meet both.  Something, I imagine , to be avoided when possible.  

Edited May 19, 2020 by Doomguide2005