Making Task Forces Challenging Again!

[Bunmaster]

Don't have to be cautious with a full IO build and incarnate powers. It's a stroll.

[Plasmar]

20 hours ago, ArchVileTerror said:

We certainly are glad to play, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of brainstorming and sharing ideas.  We're passionate about this game.  We certainly don't see eye-to-eye on many topics as a collective community, but as long as stuff doesn't get bitter and toxic, I think it's only ever a good thing to express our hopes and expectations.  Even when those have no reasonable likelihood of implementation, they may at least spawn new ideas that lead to mutually agreeable compromises.  Or at the very least help the community refine its collective identity in terms of what the Homecoming Servers mean to us.

 

Short version:  Talking about it doesn't hurt.

^ This is was I was going for.

[Six-Six]

for those who are constantly looking for challenge, I dare you to play any difficulty with a wonky mouse and keyboard... and faulty speakers 😃

 

[Generator]

On 5/24/2020 at 2:48 PM, Troo said:

Expectations of a volunteer effort related to a game from 2004 may be a bit high. We're just glad we can play, aren't we?

This part of "we" is...

[GlaziusF]

On 5/24/2020 at 12:00 AM, Heraclea said:

Tried to run Katie Hannon on +2 this evening.  It ended in tears.

 

Now, it's been my longstanding suggestion to offer master badges for Posi 1, Posi 2, and Synapse, on the usual condition: no temps, no deaths.  That would be difficult in ways that Master of ITF is not. 

Haha, yeah, I've made that Katie mistake. A purple-cliff storm defender AV is one heck of a wind wall.

[fitzsimmons]

Several of us who normally speed run content did second SO/HO builds.  No incarnates allowed.  Was fun.  We still sped through the content but we ran together as a group and had a tank/brute with taunt, a therm, kin, bubbler and a few others.

 

Not difficult by any stretch but was fun and nostalgic.

[Ironblade]

On 5/23/2020 at 1:55 PM, Plasmar said:

I propose the following to Task / Strike Forces and Incarnate Trials:

Levels 1- 30:  +0 Difficulty

Levels 30 - 40:  +1 Difficulty

Levels 40 - 50:  +2 Difficulty

Incarnates Trials:  +3 Difficulty

No.  Just no.

 

Challenging for one player is impossible for another.  Consider the parody video of Hitler complaining that they made Champions too hard.  "I should be able to face-roll my keyboard and still f***ing win!"  The option to succeed by face-rolling needs to be in the game.  Some people have feeble computers.  Some people have physical disabilities that make them less effective than YOU at playing this game.  Just because you don't find the game 'challenging' doesn't mean we need to screw over a percentage of the player base.

 

A reasonable request would be:  "We should be able to turn our difficulty setting up past +4."

[snerp]

Just run the tf at +2 or +4. I accidentally ran posi at +2 the other day and it was a blast because people actually had to use strategy and tactics.

[gameboy1234]

5 hours ago, snerp said:

Just run the tf at +2 or +4. I accidentally ran posi at +2 the other day and it was a blast because people actually had to use strategy and tactics.

While I can see folks not wanting to make the game too hard (or worse, ridiculously hard like some other games), stuff like the comment I quoted makes me feel that increasing the difficulty would actually be a big start in making the game more exciting and interesting for everyone.

 

Just to explore this a little bit, for folks who like easier content, we could take the Notoriety level -1 and make it more so on TFs, so that it actually drops the difficulty down by two or three levels.  So that if folks are really struggling they have an option to make things much easier.

 

But I think it's also something the devs could try out.  Set the default difficulty for all regular TFs to +2, and if it's a flop, just set it back to the way it was before and well we tried but it didn't work. 

 

I also think that some Incarnate Trials are already very hard (like Lambda and TPN) and setting them at +2 by default would be bad.  Outside of ITF, Incarnate content should be evaluated on a case by case basis, starting with not increasing the difficulty at all.  Also we should look at special badges for Incarnate content, how hard those are to get, and maybe consider some additional difficult sliders when getting them so that the badges don't get totally out of reach for most people.

 

[skoryy]

12 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

While I can see folks not wanting to make the game too hard (or worse, ridiculously hard like some other games), stuff like the comment I quoted makes me feel that increasing the difficulty would actually be a big start in making the game more exciting and interesting for everyone.

Increasing the difficulty is where I'd go back to playing Guild Wars 2, so no, its not 'exciting and interesting' for everyone.  The consensus has been that increasing the difficulty should be optional.  There's even a forum poll saying as much.

12 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

Set the default difficulty for all regular TFs to +2, and if it's a flop, just set it back to the way it was before and well we tried but it didn't work. 

You already have the option to run regular TFs at +2.  If few are running them there, then maybe you should ask yourself why few want to.

 

I mean, I'm sorry that Wildstar didn't pan out, but we're not here for y'all to make HC its spiritual successor.

[Ruin Mage]

the game isn't meant to be challenging.
stop trying to make coh like other mmos so much.

[golstat2003]

12 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

While I can see folks not wanting to make the game too hard (or worse, ridiculously hard like some other games), stuff like the comment I quoted makes me feel that increasing the difficulty would actually be a big start in making the game more exciting and interesting for everyone.

 

Just to explore this a little bit, for folks who like easier content, we could take the Notoriety level -1 and make it more so on TFs, so that it actually drops the difficulty down by two or three levels.  So that if folks are really struggling they have an option to make things much easier.

 

But I think it's also something the devs could try out.  Set the default difficulty for all regular TFs to +2, and if it's a flop, just set it back to the way it was before and well we tried but it didn't work. 

 

I also think that some Incarnate Trials are already very hard (like Lambda and TPN) and setting them at +2 by default would be bad.  Outside of ITF, Incarnate content should be evaluated on a case by case basis, starting with not increasing the difficulty at all.  Also we should look at special badges for Incarnate content, how hard those are to get, and maybe consider some additional difficult sliders when getting them so that the badges don't get totally out of reach for most people.

 

NO. Add in optional difficulty options. And you can use the existing ones when you run tfs for now.

[Shred Monkey]

On 5/23/2020 at 12:55 PM, Plasmar said:

I've been thinking of a way to put a challenge back in the game and I'm interested in what others think.  Lost is the art of teamwork and coordination.  Things like Tanks & Brutes who know how to properly manage aggro or Blasters targeting the same NPC, etc.

 

I propose the following to Task / Strike Forces and Incarnate Trials:

 

Levels 1- 30:  +0 Difficulty

Levels 30 - 40:  +1 Difficulty

Levels 40 - 50:  +2 Difficulty

Incarnates Trials:  +3 Difficulty

 

This would be the minimum difficulty allowed.

 

Haven't yet figured out a way to make Hami more of a challenge beside upping the Hit Points / Damage dealt.  Not sure I like that idea or not.

 

Anyway, thoughts on this?

Take it a step further.  Add a 50+ category and make it +4.   And then restrict team size to 5.   

 

We'd still breeze through every TF, but with less of that "maybe I should get superspeed so I can get to the fight before it's 1/2 over" feeling.

[gameboy1234]

28 minutes ago, skoryy said:

I mean, I'm sorry that Wildstar didn't pan out, but we're not here for y'all to make HC its spiritual successor.

This is where things get weird and hyperbolic for me.  CoH running at +2 would be nothing like Wildstar.  I mean, I didn't play it, I thought it sucked, but based on the stuff I read the developers where heavily into elite raiding guilds and stuff like that, and a TF at +2 just wouldn't even come close.

[Llewellyn Blackwell]

On 5/23/2020 at 4:09 PM, ArchVileTerror said:

Not to get -too- sassy, but . . . 

You want a REAL challenge?

You want to prove that you're the best there ever was?

 

 . . . sort through the forums and create a comprehensive guide for every thread that is about the game's difficulty.

Bonus points if you include an addendum which has a link to every post that has ever had a mere mention of game difficulty!

 

Your time starts . . . NOW!

Bloody hell! Who are you the secret love child of Vlad the Impaler and Lady Bathory, conceived at a secret spa weekend hosted by the lady?

[Luminara]

14 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

increasing the difficulty would actually be a big start in making the game more exciting and interesting for everyone.

 

The problem being that "increased difficulty" is synonymous with "MOAR PLUSSESESS KTHXBAI" here.  And it's not more difficult, it just makes us go slower.  We aren't required to alter our basic play style or exercise strategy, we merely slow down a little and keep doing what we'd do if there were fewer +'s.

 

It's like driving over a few speed bumps.  Nobody panics and runs into a brick wall because a 12” hump in the pavement was too difficult to manage.  They slow down and continue forward.  Or, if their suspension is of good quality (buffers/debuffers, team communication, ample damage output, etc.), keep cruising along at the same velocity and never notice.

 

There's really no way to make the game more exciting or interesting by adding levels to critters, because critter behavior and abilities don't change with level increases.  A +0 critter and a +6 critter are functionally identical, one just takes longer to defeat and might have a higher chance of dealing a bit more damage (dependant on team composition and/or personal build).  Unless the fundamental design of critters and AI changes, +X will never be challenging.

[Scientist]

I was on a Posi 1 a couple of weeks ago on my 50 that ultimately failed.  The leader had been running it on +2 difficulty, this being his first TF, and after half a dozen attempts and team wipes to beat our dopplegangers in the last mission the team gave up.  We tried having everyone log out and back in to reset it during play, but between one or two afks and lack of coordination couldn't get everyone to log out long enough (and we weren't sure how long that was) to get it set back down to +0.  Myself and the one other person with a 50, who wasn't on that alt but rather a lowbie tank, even tried buying temp powers at the P2W vendor, but it wasn't enough.  Ditto trying to get people to use insps, I dropped in under 15 seconds even with 50%+ defenses.  I didn't quit it, and went in a day later and finished it solo, because the difficulty had reset back down to +0, and it was set for one player.  

 

So there is definitely an option if people want higher difficulty, but I don't suggest setting the floor any higher.  

[gameboy1234]

2 hours ago, Luminara said:

The problem being that "increased difficulty" is synonymous with "MOAR PLUSSESESS KTHXBAI" here.  And it's not more difficult, it just makes us go slower.

Again, the counter to that is this:

Quote

+2 the other day and it was a blast

In other words actual evidence suggests otherwise.

 

1 hour ago, Scientist said:

I was on a Posi 1 a couple of weeks ago on my 50 that ultimately failed.  The leader had been running it on +2 difficulty,

Yeah stuff like this will be a problem.  It's been a while since I had a team have a problem with the end of Posi 1, but I'm sure it could happen.  Assuming that running TFs at +2 works most of the time, I think there's some content that was deliberately made harder (because the rest of the game is so easy) that running at +2 is unreasonable.  That particular content should be toned down.  But not everyone has an issue too, so I assume it's possible to make it through Posi at +2.

 

[TinyBolt]

It may be possible to make it through a TF at +2 but I think you're missing the point of it would not be fun or enjoyable or even possible for the average player to make TFs more difficult. It can be a struggle some nights getting teams together with easy difficulties...why insist on making it harder and less accessible for everyone when a solution exists to make it harder for just yourself?

 

For myself, I have limited time to play. I'm not going to waste my time on a game where I have to take time to carefully build a team and hope 1 hour later we don't fail. That's not fun to me. I'm glad you find it fun but that difficulty slider already is there for you. Why are you looking to mess with mine?

[ZekeStenzland]

If you’re on a task force and people think the difficulty should be raised, they generally say something. You finish out the easy mission, raise the diff for the next mission, and move on. 
 

If, on the other hand the difficulty is too high, you have to quit the tf and restart; or you have to go through some really complicated dance to get everyone out of the mission, logged out, logged back in, and the mission reset; or you have to complete the mission at a too-difficult level before you can reset it. All of these options cost extra playtime and risk losing teammates. None of these are actually good options. 
 

For practical reasons, it’s better to leave the default difficulty low and let the players bump it up themselves. 

[Luminara]

3 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

Again, the counter to that is this:

Quote

+2 the other day and it was a blast

In other words actual evidence suggests otherwise.

 

People having fun within the confines of a limited system doesn't mean that the system lacks limitation.  Nor does it mean that system is actually effective.

[skoryy]

9 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

This is where things get weird and hyperbolic for me.  CoH running at +2 would be nothing like Wildstar.  I mean, I didn't play it, I thought it sucked, but based on the stuff I read the developers where heavily into elite raiding guilds and stuff like that, and a TF at +2 just wouldn't even come close.

I wouldn't know.  The game was such a slog even at lower levels that I never made it to endgame before going back to Guild Wars 2.  Hence my comparison to running early or mid-level TFs at +2.  You're just adding hit points and reducing DPS, its not a challenge it just makes the content longer.

Edited May 30, 2020 by skoryy

[skoryy]

5 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

In other words actual evidence suggests otherwise.

I was on a Penny Yin run at +2 the other day and I couldn't finish that TF soon enough. A total chore complete with a party wipe to Clamor.

[ForeverLaxx]

You have the option to make things more difficult (though really, just slower) already. Why do you want to force that mode of play on everyone else just because you personally enjoy it? Most of this game's playerbase came here for two reasons: first, they could be a superhero. Second, it wasn't a slog that required an inordinate amount of time or personal skill to have fun. Both of these factors run against the notion that things should be harder by default.

 

If you want things to be harder, then turn things up. Don't be surprised if your team gets smaller when you do it, though.

[Doc_Scorpion]

5 hours ago, skoryy said:

I was on a Penny Yin run at +2 the other day and I couldn't finish that TF soon enough. A total chore complete with a party wipe to Clamor.

So, the question is - why was it a chore?  The +2 setting?  A badly configured team?  A team where too many players had no actual idea how to play effectively?  Synergy between one or more of these (or other) reasons?  There's a lot of things that can cause a run to go south, and not all of them are the difficulty setting itself.