Game Balance & The Endgame

[MTeague]

On 9/20/2020 at 2:19 PM, The Curator said:

Lastly...
We’re also looking at other areas long-term, such as the impact that Incarnate abilities have on non-Incarnate content,

Just about fell out of my chair.  I'd honestly given up hope on that one. 

 

I acknowledge that'll be a sensaitive one. Many people may be quite unhappy if they lose access to incarnate powers, during, say, the Maria Jenkins arc. Or Doc Quaterfield.

And I should also acknowledge, I have no idea if that's even on the table.  MY definition for "non-incarnate content" may not match the dev's definition. 

Other standard boilerplate applies. 

 

I think it's great that it's being looked at. Whether or not anything ultimately changes.

[Leogunner]

19 minutes ago, Ukase said:

When you say classes needing classes...what you're really saying is that players need other players. This is a fairly significant irritant for not a small number of players. A lot of us are working from home and have to routinely tab out and take a call or do some other work related activity. Or maybe they have kids, or maybe they want to do what they want to do when they want to do it. 
 

 

For this argument, I'd say play a single player game then.  Not gonna lie, I worked from home for about 4 months myself but I just didn't play at those times....but I will admit, I tend to only enjoy MMOs if I'm also drinking alcohol which I won't do while working from home so there's that.

 

Basically, if your responsibilities affect your gameplay, you should take the courtesy of choosing your games in kind, not subject other players to your circumstances.  I know it's common courtesy to tell people "yeah, irl is more important" blah blah blah, but there are so many great mobile games (that aren't cash shop money sinks) that don't lock you to a console/desk (the Switch is a life changer) that people should be more concerned burdening others with their limitations.

 

But at the end of the day, a lot of games are made more casual with some of these types of concerns in mind.  I guess the crux of my criticism is that gameplay can suffer by making it conform to casualness and there is a reason a market for said game type...I just don't think MMORPGs should be vying for that market....but then I guess that just depends on your level of dedication.  I'm a casual in every definition of the word but if some hardcore content was pushed out, I just likely would never reach it...which is perfectly fine.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Leogunner

[FUBARczar]

2 hours ago, BitCook said:

a) Tankers should not do damage by the original design.  HC has just fixed it so that they certainly do a lot more.
b) Blasters should not really have survivability, they were the glass cannons.  i24/25/HC has changed that by adding damage and sustainability along with the IOs to make them reasonably durable.
c) Nukes should not be an every mob thing, they should have repercussions.
d) Snipes should not be fast or in combat.
e) No one but Tanks and perhaps Brutes should be softcapping anything

A) People would stop playing tanks, and roll Brutes instead

B) I suppose veng bait is always nice

C) How about make nukes taunt all affected mobs

D) People would just start skipping Snipes again, and Elec Blast would really suck again.

E) Why not scrappers, stalkers, FF buffers, VEATS, etc?

[BitCook]

9 minutes ago, Ukase said:

My post, to this point, is a major digression from the topic of this thread, I'm aware. I'm also aware that if a melee character is so kitted out that a buff or debuff character isn't needed, then it has to make us wonder what's the point of creating the non-fotm AT/Powerset? 

Honestly and without sarcasm.  There is little min/max reason to make anything other than one of the damage dealers.  If you are going for efficiency, at the current point, one of the main damage dealers will always be more valuable than any support toon.  The kill speed is high enough that even the king of debuffs -RES just really isn't as important as it once was.

With that said, I play lots of support toons because I enjoy them.  I try to make them as good as I can to contribute to both a kitted out team and the "average Joes".  Would I be better as a damage dealer.  Yes.  I have more fun on the other toons.

 

9 minutes ago, Ukase said:

 

But, unless I read incorrectly, this is the kind of discrepency between various AT/Powersets  the HC devs are trying to address. It's a complex problem and I think we're being insincere if we don't acknowledge that some folks are going to be disappointed no matter what the HC devs do, even if they opt to do nothing. 

 

That is also true.  To get balance, kill speeds need to go down.  Which means virtually or by nerfs damage has to come down across the board.  If the support style is something that the playerbase and HC devs value, then there has to be a compelling reaason to take 20-30% of your time to do something other than damage.  There has to be a reason to take an AT that can't wipe out +4's in a simple attack chain.  The only reason to choose such an AT is if you were needed by the playerbase to do the things they already do now... which is casually stroll through most PvE content.  

If they make that change, yeah... there are going to be a lot of people REALLY upset.  When they go from solo +4/8 to maybe managing solo +2/4 I would imagine there would be a huge uproar.  Sadly, I don't think the game survives that transition.  

Which is why I'm kind of in favor of more ways that underplayed ATs can be powerful.  Not less.

[Lockpick]

9 minutes ago, parabola said:

The volunteer dev team have said they are taking a look at powers and balance and I have merely stated that I approve of the approach. This is not because I am looking for personal challenge, it is because I feel that it will result in a better functioning teaming game which is the bedrock of an mmo.

 

I would like you to retract the insult.

IMO the Devs are (like you) wrong bout the need to rebalance ATs, powers, procs, etc.  Their time would be much better spent focusing on fixing bugs and expanding content.

 

You have been cheer leading nerfs because you think the game is to easy.  Do you think the vast majority of players think the game is to easy?  Or is it a subset of power gamers who plan and optimize their builds that think the game is to easy.  I consider myself a power gamer because I play for quite a few more hours a week than I should and I plan / optimize many of my builds to be as effective as possible and I don't consider the game to easy.  So, I expect there is a subset of the subset of power gamers that disagree with you.  My point is that I believe you are in the extreme minority of players that believe the game needs to be rebalanced.  I mentioned previously that there could be exceptions like TW, but that is what they should be - exceptions.

 

I could be wrong, but this is the internet and everyone has an opinion.

 

Have you done any of the things that were suggested to alleviate the challenge you lack?

• Played 801 AE content?
• Created your own hard mode content?
• Play characters with only SO or basic IOs?
• Do you play characters in incarnate content without incarnates slotted? 
• Done hard mode challenges?
• Have you developed a player network of like minded players and/or created a SG that imposes the limits you want, so you will feel the challenge you desire?

If you have done all of these things and still think the game is to easy for the vast majority of players I will retract my selfish and lazy comment.  It means you have at least tried to alleviate your own challenge issues.  You didn't respond previously that you have done these things, so my assumption is you have not.

 

I would also make the suggestion that you think about what you are asking for.  If the Devs rebalance this game and make things harder for the vast majority of players; many of them will leave and go to another server or game.  We don't have the population that we can afford to lose players because of rebalancing that IMO is not needed.

 

[BitCook]

1 minute ago, FUBARczar said:

A) People would stop playing tanks, and roll Brutes instead

B) I suppose veng bait is always nice

C) How about make nukes taunt all affected mobs

D) People would just start skipping Snipes again, and Elec Blast would really suck again.

E) Why not scrappers, stalkers, FF buffers, VEATS, etc?

So the point of the post was not to call for nerfs to those things... although, frankly it would make the game more balanced if they did.  It was to point out that so much has changed in the current environment, that saying "Support ATs should not have easy access to Defense because that wasn't the intent of the class" is not a real valid argument.  We're long past the the original intent of the designers of this game and into something different.  Different isn't always bad, but expecting certain parts to adhere to outdated paradigms isn't very fair unless you are going to make all classes adhere to outdated paradigms.

We have the game we have.  Trying to balance on what it used to be is not a good idea.  Balancing on what it is and what this team wants it to be is a good idea.

 

However, just for fun:
a) Yes.  Agreed.
b) Again agreed.
c) Sure?  But usually one AOE after and they are dead anyway.
d) Yes.
e) Because the old paradigm was that they traded increased damage for survivability.  If they can hit softcap, then they're not really giving much up for the additional damage.

[Lockpick]

7 minutes ago, BitCook said:

That is also true.  To get balance, kill speeds need to go down.  Which means virtually or by nerfs damage has to come down across the board.  If the support style is something that the playerbase and HC devs value, then there has to be a compelling reaason to take 20-30% of your time to do something other than damage.  There has to be a reason to take an AT that can't wipe out +4's in a simple attack chain.  The only reason to choose such an AT is if you were needed by the playerbase to do the things they already do now... which is casually stroll through most PvE content.  

If they make that change, yeah... there are going to be a lot of people REALLY upset.  When they go from solo +4/8 to maybe managing solo +2/4 I would imagine there would be a huge uproar.  Sadly, I don't think the game survives that transition.  

Which is why I'm kind of in favor of more ways that underplayed ATs can be powerful.  Not less.

 

Exactly true.  There is absolutely no win for the Dev team taking the rebalancing path.  Rebalancing merely leads to more rebalancing which never ends.  The better path is providing more avenues for player created content that provides the hard mode content people want.  I think we already have a good base that can be used today and with a few tweaks and community involvement it would be much more effective than going down the rebalancing path.

 

This is so obvious to me I am wondering why no one else seems to be able to see it.  It's like looking at Tesla stock and wondering why all the big shot financial analysts on CNBC are not able to understand that Tesla is not a car company.

 

Now I am having second thoughts and doubts.  Is it possible I am wrong?  Naw, can't be...

[Parabola]

15 minutes ago, Lockpick said:

If you have done all of these things and still think the game is to easy for the vast majority of players I will retract my selfish and lazy comment.  It means you have at least tried to alleviate your own challenge issues.  You didn't respond previously that you have done these things, so my assumption is you have not.

You are absolutely correct in your assumption that I've done none of those things. This is because, as I said before, I am not looking for personal challenge. I believe that balance problems are detrimental to this game as a whole, mainly due to how the teaming experience for the average player deteriorates at high levels. I may be wrong about this but whether that is the case or not it certainly doesn't make me selfish or lazy and I very much resent that accusation.

 

I would like you to retract that comment.

[Ralathar44]

1 hour ago, BitCook said:

So I would say two things.

(1) I believe this interaction has been around as long as Time has existed as a powerset.  So if design intent is the argument, then yes, this is working as designed.

(2) I actually agree that the game was designed as a team combination.  However, that design is as dead is Pre ED builds are.  That paradigm doesn't exist in this game any more.  IOs were the first nail in the coffin and the steady power creep was the last.  I would agree that there are too many self sufficient toons.

a) Tankers should not do damage by the original design.  HC has just fixed it so that they certainly do a lot more.
b) Blasters should not really have survivability, they were the glass cannons.  i24/25/HC has changed that by adding damage and sustainability along with the IOs to make them reasonably durable.
c) Nukes should not be an every mob thing, they should have repercussions.
d) Snipes should not be fast or in combat.
e) No one but Tanks and perhaps Brutes should be softcapping anything
I could go on with more, but we have so many things have changed in the game that they're too numerous to list.

Those are all massive game changes since Team interactions was important for AT identity.  Controllers are my favorite AT, but they are mostly worthless in today's game because of the massive changes that have happened.  Some by this team, some by the dev's in live.  That's the game we have now.  If you are going to pick powers and apply them to a design principle, I would think you have to design to the current environment, not the original intent.  The original intent doesn't exist anymore and if the argument is flipping the script is bad, then let's roll all the way back and I'll be way happier because my favorite AT will have purpose again.

And all of that makes me sad TBH.  Because what we're doing ti careening back at full speed to a pre-ED game and while the slotting part of that was fairly silly (IOs later let you have more choice slotting..without needing set bonuses to do it) the global defense and control nerfs and AOE caps and stuff were absolutely needed for game health, because it allowed every AT and every team member to be useful and feel like they were carrying just as much weight again where before many were basically completely irrelevant. 

But we're just starting to repeat all the same mistakes again.  Once again the game is heavily gravitating towards certain ATs being able to do everything and not needing anyone and the ATs that have more supportive or utillity roles are being left behind.  This includes controllers too.  Controllers are no longer controllers since end game control gets trivialized by kill speeds.  Controllers are becoming just another damage dealer.  And yes, Fire/kin and stuff always existed but now that's being forced to be the role of all controllers and indeed alot of the controller suggestions I've seen are all asking for more damage.

I've accepted that the train has jumped the tracks and we're headed to a new destination.  The HC devs have every right to keep going in that direction if they so choose.  Some of the community has every right to enjoy that direction.  But without a doubt the game has become almost exclusively about damage and has lost alot of what made COH special.  If you're a brute/tanker/scrapper/blaster/controller who wants more damage/corruptor focusing on damage this is fantastic news for you.  If you're a defender/corruptor focusing on more support, controllers who wants to actually control/suport/debuff/ the ever ignored MMs/doms who ahve been overshadowed by the rising power of other ATs/etc however it's not the best of news.

But we can see that the overwhelming majority of current players play damage classes.  Controllers are the only "support" class played as much as the damage classes but their most popular power sets are illusion/fire and kinetics/Rad by a huge margin so they are heavily tilted towards damage focused too.


It is what it is.  I've accepted that all the offensive classes want to be strong enough to basically invalidate the role of support except as dmg buff, leadership, and -res dispensers.  But I'm still going to make noise about it.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Ralathar44

[macskull]

36 minutes ago, BitCook said:

To get balance, kill speeds need to go down.  Which means virtually or by nerfs damage has to come down across the board.

I assume based on the rest of your post you meant kill speed needs to go up but if you raise time-to-kill you're just going to further bias the meta in favor of DPS (things will take longer to kill or things will do less damage, therefore I will need more damage dealers to accomplish the same thing) which means you'll have even fewer support characters making appearances. I also don't understand where the "support isn't valuable" argument comes from, especially because support still acts as a force multiplier for the entire team to the point where it's usually more beneficial to bring a support character than another DPS character.

 

If you look at, for example, the Task Force Olympics stuff (speed task force races, basically) most teams consist of Blasters and Corruptors/Defenders with the occasional Scrapper thrown in. It's very rare to find a "speed" team without any form of support. I mean, hell, if I see a random TF forming in LFG or general or a global channel and I ask the team lead what they want the answer is usually "support or DPS." The role of support is far from marginalized in this game. There may be support sets that have been marginalized (Empathy and Force Fields come to mind) but support as a whole is still extremely valuable.

Edited September 23, 2020 by macskull
formatting

[BitCook]

7 minutes ago, macskull said:

I assume based on the rest of your post you meant kill speed needs to go up but if you raise time-to-kill you're just going to further bias the meta in favor of DPS (things will take longer to kill or things will do less damage, therefore I will need more damage dealers to accomplish the same thing) which means you'll have even fewer support characters making appearances. I also don't understand where the "support isn't valuable" argument comes from, especially because support still acts as a force multiplier for the entire team to the point where it's usually more beneficial to bring a support character than another DPS character. If you look at, for example, the Task Force Olympics stuff (speed task force races, basically) most teams consist of Blasters and Corruptors/Defenders with the occasional Scrapper thrown in. It's very rare to find a "speed" team without any form of support.

You are correct.  I did mean that, thank you!

I disagree in that it would mean more DPS classes.  The game used to have a lot less DPS and survivability.  In that meta, control/support was a very vital element in determining team survival.  Support sets were more than -RES bots and buffs/debuffs were essential to a well running team.  Being able to hold a boss/stun a group was often the difference between success or a wipe.  When DPS and survivability gets to the point that there are toons which can clear +4/8 solo, what is the need for Support?  We're not exactly at that point, but we're not far off either.

Support becomes less valuable when toons continue to get tools to maximize their own survivability, increase their damage, and generally act in a self sufficient manner in nearly all content.  

Again, I don't see the game ever going back to that point again.  To many nerfs/balances would have to happen to get back to those days.  However, I do think it's relevant when talking about balance passes that remove viability for support/control classes which are already struggling to find a good place.

Edited September 23, 2020 by BitCook

[Ukase]

38 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

For this argument, I'd say play a single player game then.  Not gonna lie, I worked from home for about 4 months myself but I just didn't play at those times....but I will admit, I tend to only enjoy MMOs if I'm also drinking alcohol which I won't do while working from home so there's that.

 

Basically, if your responsibilities affect your gameplay, you should take the courtesy of choosing your games in kind, not subject other players to your circumstances.  I know it's common courtesy to tell people "yeah, irl is more important" blah blah blah, but there are so many great mobile games (that aren't cash shop money sinks) that don't lock you to a console/desk (the Switch is a life changer) that people should be more concerned burdening others with their limitations.

 

But at the end of the day, a lot of games are made more casual with some of these types of concerns in mind.  I guess the crux of my criticism is that gameplay can suffer by making it conform to casualness and there is a reason a market for said game type...I just don't think MMORPGs should be vying for that market....but then I guess that just depends on your level of dedication.  I'm a casual in every definition of the word but if some hardcore content was pushed out, I just likely would never reach it...which is perfectly fine.

I basically just limit my teaming to those times when I don't have to go afk at random times. The idea of playing another game...well, I didn't when CoH shut down, beyond trying the other games at that time. They just didn't do it. This one does. So, I'll keep playing  - afk when I need to, and team up when I choose to and can commit to solid blocks of time. But that's me. The game didn't change because of my scheduling conflicts. It changed because the private server that only a few new about had to change because only a few were playing. 

I don't know how HC would change things if they suddenly got the blessing of NCSoft to run the game as they saw fit. It would be an interesting time, indeed. 

 

[carroto]

On 9/20/2020 at 3:36 PM, Seed22 said:

It's not. At all. All it does is damage, take that away and well..it sucks

True for Fire Blast.  Want an example of what that would look like?  See Fire Melee.  All it does is damage, and it doesn't do that well.  I can't remember the last time I saw a Fire Melee character.

[macskull]

17 minutes ago, BitCook said:

You are correct.  I did mean that, thank you!

I disagree in that it would mean more DPS classes.  The game used to have a lot less DPS and survivability.  In that meta, control/support was a very vital element in determining team survival.  Support sets were more than -RES bots and buffs/debuffs were essential to a well running team.  Being able to hold a boss/stun a group was often the difference between success or a wipe.  When DPS and survivability gets to the point that there are toons which can clear +4/8 solo, what is the need for Support?  We're not exactly at that point, but we're not far off either.

Support becomes less valuable when toons continue to get tools to maximize their own survivability, increase their damage, and generally act in a self sufficient manner in nearly all content.  

Again, I don't see the game ever going back to that point again.  To many nerfs/balances would have to happen to get back to those days.  However, I do think it's relevant when talking about balance passes that remove viability for support/control classes which are already struggling to find a good place.

(Emphasis mine) If we're being honest, most characters can't do that, at least not at a reasonable pace. Sure, in theory something like an Emp/AR Defender could solo +4x8 but it'd be devastatingly slow and I think these forums and the Discord seriously overestimate the number of players who even care about being able to do that in the first place, let alone make characters with that in mind.

 

I am curious which time frame you're referring to when you say the game used to have a lot less DPS and survivability because it really shifts the frame of reference. If you're talking post-ED through pre-IO (issues 6-8 basically) then sure, but that was only a year and a half of the game's original 8-and-a-half-year run which makes it more the exception than the norm. I didn't play the game then, but a game where everyone was essentially slotted exactly the same way would not have held my attention very long.

Edited September 23, 2020 by macskull

[ScarySai]

57 minutes ago, FUBARczar said:

c) Nukes should not be an every mob thing, they should have repercussions.

They used to, and they were often skipped or got the user killed for doing it.

 

If Paragon saw it fit to buff those, I don't see any valid reason to get rid of it now.

[Ralathar44]

19 minutes ago, BitCook said:

You are correct.  I did mean that, thank you!

I disagree in that it would mean more DPS classes.  The game used to have a lot less DPS and survivability.  In that meta, control/support was a very vital element in determining team survival.  Support sets were more than -RES bots and buffs/debuffs were essential to a well running team.  Being able to hold a boss/stun a group was often the difference between success or a wipe.  When DPS and survivability gets to the point that there are toons which can clear +4/8 solo, what is the need for Support?  We're not exactly at that point, but we're not far off either.

Support becomes less valuable when toons continue to get tools to maximize their own survivability, increase their damage, and generally act in a self sufficient manner in nearly all content.  

Again, I don't see the game ever going back to that point again.  To many nerfs/balances would have to happen to get back to those days.  However, I do think it's relevant when talking about balance passes that remove viability for support/control classes which are already struggling to find a good place.

My first 50 ever was an Earth/Emp Controller and crowd control, even post ED where control was gutted, felt infinitely more useful and powerful than it does today.  Like sure, my controllers are safer and kill things faster now but that's never why I played controller.  illusion/kin and fire/kkin always existed if you wanted a damage controller.  But today control feels as great as it used to up until about midway through the leveling process, then crowd control starts to feel very very irrelevant.  In end game today controller is mostly just DPS with different graphics and some minor support usually focused around -res or damage buffs because nothing else is needed anymore.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Ralathar44

[carroto]

4 minutes ago, macskull said:

I am curious which time frame you're referring to when you say the game used to have a lot less DPS and survivability

Everything before HC.  Sure most of the same IOs were available before, but they weren't nearly so easy to get, and so I didn't see so many fully IO'ed characters.  I would occasionally, but it wasn't half the members of the team who could go off and solo on their own.  A lot more people were running SOs, with maybe a few IO sets thrown in as they could afford them.  When I pooled my resources to IO a character early, the performance difference on teams was noticeable.  It was common to be on teams where I could do things no one else could.

 

Things tended to move a bit slower and teams had to work together and support each other more.  The difference from retail to HC is quite noticeable.  I appreciate not having to grind here to get IOs the way I did then, but it has had some (presumably) unintended consequences.

[Bionic_Flea]

4 hours ago, Lockpick said:

What is the problem you are trying to solve?

 

The reason this thread has gone off the rails is that it seems everyone has a different perspective of what the problem seems to be.   Some believe some power sets are OP, some believe Procs are OP, some believe the game content is to easy, some want to get rid of or limit incarnate powers, some don't see any major issues (I fall into this camp).

 

Once you figure out the problem we should look at solutions that can be managed in game by the community.  Leveraging Devs should be a last resort.

 

When you have many players that can solo +4/x8 any additional player is superfluous.  There's nothing wrong in my mind to want to be able to solo like that.  But having the character that can easily solo +4/8 participate in a team at less than 50 and still have 100% of their powers, including I-Powers (except for the 2nd and 3rd level shift), is beyond absurd and makes the rest of the team completely superfluous while the Uber-character isn't even breaking a sweat.   Beyond that, it makes little logical or lore sense for one to have all those powers when specifically "powering down" to help, which is what the exemp system is supposed to represent.

[macskull]

1 minute ago, Ralathar44 said:

My first 50 ever was an Earth/Emp Controller and crwod control, even post ED where control was gutted, felt infinitely more useful and powerful than it does today.  Like sure, my controllers are safer and kill things faster now but that's never why I played controller.  illusion/kin and fire/kkin always existed if you wanted a damage controller.  But today control feels as great as it used to up until about midway through the leveling process, then crowd control starts to feel very very irrelevant.  In end game today controller is mostly just DPS with different graphics and some minor support usually focused around -res or damage buffs because nothing else is needed anymore.

Meanwhile you've got people complaining about playing City of Statues and how going up against a bunch of CC'd mobs who can't fight back is boring. So now we're at a weird point here:

• You are claiming Controllers are just DPS with minor support and CC is irrelevant
• But Controllers don't have the highest buff/debuff modifiers on their support sets and they certainly don't out-DPS the other support ATs
• Yet somehow Controllers are the most-played support AT

So maybe players actually do still value CC.

[macskull]

2 minutes ago, carroto said:

Everything before HC.  Sure most of the same IOs were available before, but they weren't nearly so easy to get, and so I didn't see so many fully IO'ed characters.  I would occasionally, but it wasn't half the members of the team who could go off and solo on their own.  A lot more people were running SOs, with maybe a few IO sets thrown in as they could afford them.  When I pooled my resources to IO a character early, the performance difference on teams was noticeable.  It was common to be on teams where I could do things no one else could.

 

Things tended to move a bit slower and teams had to work together and support each other more.  The difference from retail to HC is quite noticeable.  I appreciate not having to grind here to get IOs the way I did then, but it has had some (presumably) unintended consequences.

You're not the person I was replying to and based on the context of their posts I'd say your answer isn't the one they would give, but I'll bite.

 

Yes, IOs and incarnates are more available on Homecoming than they were on live. I think that's a huge chunk of the appeal. If that stuff went away the playerbase would be (understandably) extremely unhappy. You're implying that these heavily-IOd characters are the norm where in reality that is probably not the case. Like I said earlier in this thread we don't have any hard numbers so all we have to go on is anecdotal evidence, but while we're on anecdotal evidence I can simply cite the number of people in help or general chat insisting that Sentinels are good, or Empathy is a great support set, or that Assault Rifle has the best AoEs in the game as evidence that not everyone is even playing the same game at this point.

[FUBARczar]

1 hour ago, ScarySai said:

They used to, and they were often skipped or got the user killed for doing it.

 

If Paragon saw it fit to buff those, I don't see any valid reason to get rid of it now.

agreed, but the timers could be extended slightly to make them more strategic, but I was always against the crash (in every power)

[Ralathar44]

16 minutes ago, carroto said:

True for Fire Blast.  Want an example of what that would look like?  See Fire Melee.  All it does is damage, and it doesn't do that well.  I can't remember the last time I saw a Fire Melee character.

Fire Melee has 2 pbaoes and a ranged cone.  It does pretty good AOE damage for a melee set.  You see Martial Arts all the time and that has diddly for AOE and many tanker sets only have 1 pbaoe and 1 melee cone.  When you say it doesn't do damage well is there a DPS chart or missions clear chart you can point to or is that comment based on "I feel"?  Because I'd love to see that data if you have it available.

[Lockpick]

1 minute ago, parabola said:

You are absolutely correct in your assumption that I've done none of those things. This is because, as I said before, I am not looking for personal challenge. I believe that balance problems are detrimental to this game as a whole, mainly due to how the teaming experience for the average player deteriorates at high levels. I may be wrong about this but whether that is the case or not it certainly doesn't make me selfish or lazy and I very much resent that accusation.

 

I would like you to retract that comment.

 

So, you think there is a problem with game balance, but you admit you could be wrong about the problem.  Other players (of which I seem to be the most vocal) have indicated that you are wrong about the problem, but you believe they are wrong.  Therefore you have at least 2 groups of people on opposite ends of the spectrum who both believe they are right.

 

Instead of trying to alleviate your concern by leveraging the existing in game functionality and community outreach to see if it might alleviate your concern you indicate that the Devs should solve the problem by rebalancing, regardless of how many other players that would impact.

 

I will retract the selfish and lazy part of the comment because it was not really nice and I suppose I should be nicer, but I would respectfully suggest you really think about what you are asking for, how many people will be affected, the negative impact to those being impacted, and maybe look at other solutions to the problem you believe exists.

 

My solution to the problem does not affect anyone in a negative fashion, does not require respecs or re-rolls, does not ruin the fun of people that enjoy the game in its current state.  I think we should be thinking harder about those types of solutions as opposed to expecting the Devs to solve our challenges.

 

Again, to be clear, I am not talking about not doing rebalancing where required; I am talking about wholesale rebalancing. 

 

[BitCook]

10 minutes ago, macskull said:

(Emphasis mine) If we're being honest, most characters can't do that, at least not at a reasonable pace. Sure, in theory something like an Emp/AR Defender could solo +4x8 but it'd be devastatingly slow and I think these forums and the Discord seriously overestimate the number of players who even care about being able to do that in the first place, let alone make characters with that in mind.

 

I am curious which time frame you're referring to when you say the game used to have a lot less DPS and survivability because it really shifts the frame of reference. If you're talking post-ED through pre-IO (issues 6-8 basically) then sure, but that was only a year and a half of the game's original 8-and-a-half-year run which makes it more the exception than the norm. I didn't play the game then, but a game where everyone was essentially slotted exactly the same way would not have held my attention very long.

I played from launch until about i10/12 then on and off from there.

IOs were both a boon and a curse.  A boon in that they added build options like few games have or have had.  I love that aspect of the game.  But they also started the decline of AT roles.  Yes, kill speed on a lot of toons at +4/8 solo would be slow, but the fact that there are lots of builds that can is part of the problem.  

That is at the extreme end, and I'd admit that.  However, it doesn't take more than a couple of tricked out toons... maybe they can only handle +3/8 on their own... to basically invalidate the need for anything other than more damage.  That is very common.  I do PUGs all the time.  I play support toons nearly 100% of the time; Controllers/Doms/Defenders/Corruptors.  In most groups you can barely get off your -RES debuff before the mob is dead.  At those speeds you certainly don't need to use most anything other than damage.  That was not how the game used to be.  There was time and space for characters to debuff mobs, set up control, and do other things to make missioning interesting and varied.

However, the argument I've been trying to advocate has kind of gotten lost.  I've said going back would likely be suicide for the game.  To many people would be upset and feel like their toons were nerfed into the ground.  I am arguing that removing any viable options from those marginalized toons is not a good idea unless you are going to head back to a state where teams needed to kind of work together more than they do now.

[Ralathar44]

13 minutes ago, macskull said:

Meanwhile you've got people complaining about playing City of Statues and how going up against a bunch of CC'd mobs who can't fight back is boring. So now we're at a weird point here:

• You are claiming Controllers are just DPS with minor support and CC is irrelevant
• But Controllers don't have the highest buff/debuff modifiers on their support sets and they certainly don't out-DPS the other support ATs
• Yet somehow Controllers are the most-played support AT

So maybe players actually do still value CC.

The overwhelming majority of controllers are the DPS variety playing fire/ill kin/rad.  There are more fire/ill controllers out there than literally all other controller powersets and kin/rad is just barely under being the same way.

You imply it's nonesensical that people would play non-DPS classes who are nowhere near the best at DPS as DPS, but unfortunately that's exactly what people do.  And I don't blame them.  Control is not relevant at high level and neither are the vast majority of buffs/debuffs.

The whole city of statues that thing was real, PRE-ED.  But once the global nerfs on everyone (including control) came through there was no city of statues anymore or even close so honestly that's a weird argument to see resurrected.  Especially when average hero power at high end games makes mobs so irrelevant they might as well be statues.  What's the difference between beating up a statue and beating up something that never gets a chance to move because it dies to fast and couldn't kill you even if you let it try?  Functionally they are the same.  You're killing a helpless opponent that is no threat to you and never gets a chance to do anything.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Ralathar44