Issue 27: Second Chances, Page 1 - Out Now!

[WindDemon21]

1 minute ago, Wavicle said:

Suggested as in the Devs  are aware that people asked for this, and they chose not to do it, intentionally. They actually read every comment in the beta threads. Truly they do.

Call me a stickler, but if they never responded to this specifically, how do you know that they are aware, or at the very least considered it etc? If they did and won't budge and say no that's one thing, if we TRULY didn't get a response from them saying so though, I'd prefer to hear it directly from them, rather than just assume so. I can imagine though them not wanting it for the whole ET > TF > EP though, but i'm more so looking at it's use for the extra aoe on PC. There isn't a way i'm aware of though to flag the build up to only work for PC though, so I imagine there is no way to do that to avoid it for ET.

 

The only other thing would be to change the mechanic (which I would almost favor to take away it's tie in to ONLY TF granting it) where it works more like Street Justice's and after 3 attacks you get the energy focus, but I imagine at this point they wouldn't look further into EM.

[Wavicle]

1 minute ago, WindDemon21 said:

Call me a stickler, but if they never responded to this specifically, how do you know that they are aware, or at the very least considered it etc? If they did and won't budge and say no that's one thing, if we TRULY didn't get a response from them saying so though, I'd prefer to hear it directly from them, rather than just assume so. I can imagine though them not wanting it for the whole ET > TF > EP though, but i'm more so looking at it's use for the extra aoe on PC. There isn't a way i'm aware of though to flag the build up to only work for PC though, so I imagine there is no way to do that to avoid it for ET.

 

The only other thing would be to change the mechanic (which I would almost favor to take away it's tie in to ONLY TF granting it) where it works more like Street Justice's and after 3 attacks you get the energy focus, but I imagine at this point they wouldn't look further into EM.

I’m not really sure why or how you’re able to convince yourself that they weren’t aware of the request. I’m pretty certain they were aware and intentionally chose not to do it because they felt it would be overpowered. And I agree with them. The set is now one of the very best single target sets in the game. That ought to be enough.

[WindDemon21]

1 minute ago, Wavicle said:

I’m not really sure why or how you’re able to convince yourself that they weren’t aware of the request. I’m pretty certain they were aware and intentionally chose not to do it because they felt it would be overpowered. And I agree with them. The set is now one of the very best single target sets in the game. That ought to be enough.

Oh it's not that I don't think they specifically wouldn't be aware, but I'm simply talking about knowing for 100% fact and be done with it rather than just assume, cause you know that old addage. I'm not saying EM is bad, just that it's a little clunky trying to max out your aoe on the first alpha volley. You could consider it just rantings if you must, but these are my thoughts and I'm curious on the devs thoughts/answers on that. I would, as I even stated above assume it's what we just discussed, but you know, curious minds.

[Jimmy]

We're aware. It was considered. EM went through many iterations during testing, and we're very happy with where it ended up.

[Wavicle]

3 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

Oh it's not that I don't think they specifically wouldn't be aware, but I'm simply talking about knowing for 100% fact and be done with it rather than just assume, cause you know that old addage. I'm not saying EM is bad, just that it's a little clunky trying to max out your aoe on the first alpha volley. You could consider it just rantings if you must, but these are my thoughts and I'm curious on the devs thoughts/answers on that. I would, as I even stated above assume it's what we just discussed, but you know, curious minds.

I would guess that they specifically do not want you to be able to max out aoe on the first volley. It's not fair for a set to be that good at aoe while also being that good at single target. That's why Titan Weapons was nerfed.

[WindDemon21]

1 minute ago, Jimmy said:

We're aware. It was considered. EM went through many iterations during testing, and we're very happy with where it ended up.

OK, I figured but thanks for replying! ❤️ ❤️ ❤️

[WindDemon21]

6 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

We're aware. It was considered. EM went through many iterations during testing, and we're very happy with where it ended up.

God I love this dev team so much better than the old one, I can only imagine never getting a response or this not even being a discussion on live.

[Panthonca7034]

My suggestion is directed more @Piecemeal in regards to The Graveyard Shift and The Freakish Lab of Dr Vahzilok arcs.

 

 

Since these two arcs take place somewhere between level 20-26 (I think it's 26, but not sure) and Praetorians (Goldsiders) leave at level 20, is there a possibility to tweak Dr Pierce and the FBSA Agent's dialogue with a choice to reference the player's Goldside origin or ask the player, or even mention something like "You don't appear to be from this dimension... where are you really from?" or have the player make a comment that gives away his Goldside origin? Is it also possible for the Resistance/TEST Loyalist Portal Keepers to provide the player some information about Dr Vahzilok (If going Redside), or The FBSA Agent (If going Blueside) arc before crossing the portal rift into Primal Earth?

 

And is there also a way to somehow add a reference to Dr Vasilikos from Praetoria?

 

Just a thought...

[Blood Speaker]

Redesign the Hopkins fight in the Cap Au Diable "Steal From Crey" mission. It's uncalled for jerkery to bury a two-person team in an endless swarm of even pint-sized, monkey-farting Paragon Protectors. "Challenging" and "cheating" are two different things.

 

That irritating power was, presumably, designed to make an enemy intolerably annoying to every Mastermind ever designed. Even with the improved pet AI, it renders pets a sudden and frequently fatal liability. Ask yourself how any other AT would feel about having their entire primary powerset taken away, while aggroing every enemy within 100+ yards.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Blood Speaker

[tygenco]

5 hours ago, Blood Speaker said:

Redesign the Hopkins fight in the Cap Au Diable "Steal From Crey" mission. I's uncalled for jerkery to bury a two-person team in an endless swarm of even pint-sized, monkey-farting  Paragon Protectors. "Challenging" and "cheating" are two different things.

Echoing this. ☝️☝️

 

Also going to point out that between the endless ambush nonsense and the rikti-monkey-fart deaths of the mini Protectors, there's no way to get anything done, especially when facing an enemy that cons as an EB.  The moment you return to the map after retreating to hospital or to base, you're not going to make it back to the point you were at, as the ambushes have traipsed their way down a few floors and will proceed to pile on you so fast that you're lucky if you can get off one or three shots.

 

Seriously, someone needs to fix this.

Edited December 14, 2020 by tygenco
Additional info

[Piecemeal]

10 hours ago, Blood Speaker said:

Redesign the Hopkins fight in the Cap Au Diable "Steal From Crey" mission. It's uncalled for jerkery to bury a two-person team in an endless swarm of even pint-sized, monkey-farting Paragon Protectors. "Challenging" and "cheating" are two different things.

 

That irritating power was, presumably, designed to make an enemy intolerably annoying to every Mastermind ever designed. Even with the improved pet AI, it renders pets a sudden and frequently fatal liability. Ask yourself how any other AT would feel about having their entire primary powerset taken away, while aggroing every enemy within 100+ yards.

 

10 hours ago, tygenco said:

Echoing this. ☝️☝️

 

Also going to point out that between the endless ambush nonsense and the rikti-monkey-fart deaths of the mini Protectors, there's no way to get anything done, especially when facing an enemy that cons as an EB.  The moment you return to the map after retreating to hospital or to base, you're not going to make it back to the point you were at, as the ambushes have traipsed their way down a few floors and will proceed to pile on you so fast that you're lucky if you can get off one or three shots.

 

Seriously, someone needs to fix this.

You know, fair point. I don't play MMs and never got any feedback in testing from one. I'll look into this.

[Completist]

The Blaster Manipulation T1s (that immobilize) have been adjusted and equalized over time. Can one of the devs comment on the reasoning behind this choice? I am skeptical that "to make them equal" is a valid reason, but I don't know if there's more thought behind it.

As T1 secondary is the only power you're required to take, the little differences create meaningful choices in character creation and add to the flavor of the set. Balancing them by making them equivalent (equal damage and range) makes those secondaries a little more 'samey'.

 

Edited December 17, 2020 by Completist

[Ultimo]

22 minutes ago, Completist said:

The Blaster Manipulation T1s (that immobilize) have been adjusted and equalized over time. Can one of the devs comment on the reasoning behind this choice? I am skeptical that "to make them equal" is a valid reason, but I don't know if there's more thought behind it.

As T1 secondary is the only power you're required to take, the little differences create meaningful choices in character creation and add to the flavor of the set. Balancing them by making them equivalent (equal damage and range) makes those secondaries a little more 'samey'.

 

You see, I have the opposite point of view.  Because that first power is the only one you have no choice of, it's necessary they all be more or less equal so no set is at a disadvantage you have no control over.  Where there's no choice, there's no meaningful choices to make beyond "Don't take that power set," and that should never be a choice.

[Clave Dark 5]

On 11/24/2020 at 5:08 PM, Grimz said:

 It always felt weird that I had to sheath my sword or put away my pistols just to kick a guy in the face lol

Do you?  I often take Kick instead of Boxing when I start up the Fighting tree, even if I don't use it much, but from what I've seen when I do, the weapon stays out.

[Blood Speaker]

On 12/14/2020 at 3:07 AM, Piecemeal said:

 

You know, fair point. I don't play MMs and never got any feedback in testing from one. I'll look into this.

Fair enough, and that's all I'm asking. I *do* play a lot of MMs, but... well, lets just say life had a way of consuming any "free time" I genuinely wanted to spend testing the issue before it went live.

[Completist]

On 12/17/2020 at 4:36 PM, Ultimo said:

You see, I have the opposite point of view.  Because that first power is the only one you have no choice of, it's necessary they all be more or less equal so no set is at a disadvantage you have no control over.  Where there's no choice, there's no meaningful choices to make beyond "Don't take that power set," and that should never be a choice.

I can understand how you feel that way--it's clearly the more popular opinion based on upvotes--but from a designer's perspective, making T1s identical is likely to have the opposite effect.

 

Even though Temporal Manipulation's T1 didn't do damage, it was still popular because it was a strong secondary. The flavor of the month gets the most play and generates the most feedback; I bet there were lots of /TMs complaining about T1 imbalance. I could be wrong, but with no perceived tradeoff, I'd wager that /TM became more prevalent in the 2 months since that change, even though the set got nerfed. Perhaps not. Lots of Manipulation secondaries got interesting buffs at the same time. I don't have the data, but they would be interesting to examine.

 

The reason there is a perceived "disadvantage you have no control over" is because the immobilize T1s were too similar in the first place. If those powers had been more varied, more powerful, and geared toward the intended strategy pathway for each set, there would be no frustrating (illusion of) disparity.

 

There should be cooler options, not equivalent ones. Give me a mag 1 stacking hold in /cold, or a short melee cone (3 targets) in /fire, or a cheaper faster non-damaging net arrow, etc. You're stuck with that power, so it should be signature to your choice of secondary; Not just tucked away on hotbar 2 and maybe slotted when you reach the endgame. 

[Ultimo]

1 hour ago, Completist said:

I can understand how you feel that way--it's clearly the more popular opinion based on upvotes--but from a designer's perspective, making T1s identical is likely to have the opposite effect.

 

Even though Temporal Manipulation's T1 didn't do damage, it was still popular because it was a strong secondary. The flavor of the month gets the most play and generates the most feedback; I bet there were lots of /TMs complaining about T1 imbalance. I could be wrong, but with no perceived tradeoff, I'd wager that /TM became more prevalent in the 2 months since that change, even though the set got nerfed. Perhaps not. Lots of Manipulation secondaries got interesting buffs at the same time. I don't have the data, but they would be interesting to examine.

 

The reason there is a perceived "disadvantage you have no control over" is because the immobilize T1s were too similar in the first place. If those powers had been more varied, more powerful, and geared toward the intended strategy pathway for each set, there would be no frustrating (illusion of) disparity.

 

There should be cooler options, not equivalent ones. Give me a mag 1 stacking hold in /cold, or a short melee cone (3 targets) in /fire, or a cheaper faster non-damaging net arrow, etc. You're stuck with that power, so it should be signature to your choice of secondary; Not just tucked away on hotbar 2 and maybe slotted when you reach the endgame. 

Think of it this way, then.  A character who has a power at tier 1 of their secondary that is more or less worthless... has ONE LESS power at his disposal than other characters who have a useful power at that tier.  This puts him at a disadvantage relative to those others.  Now, it's not likely to be a huge problem, but it IS a disadvantage that many would say shouldn't exist.

 

My Tanker is required to take Jab.  I find it to be a more or less worthless power.  It uses endurance to make an attack that does almost nothing, endurance better used by other attacks.  This means my Tanker has one fewer attacks to use than other characters.  More, if he wants to substitute some other attack in its place, it means using a second slot to do it.

 

[Completist]

1 minute ago, Ultimo said:

My Tanker is required to take Jab.  I find it to be a more or less worthless power.  It uses endurance to make an attack that does almost nothing, endurance better used by other attacks.  This means my Tanker has one fewer attacks to use than other characters.  More, if he wants to substitute some other attack in its place, it means using a second slot to do it.

I totally agree with you that that is a problematic feature of CoH's design. And equalizing all Tanker /T1s wouldn't fix it! 

 

How about opening up both /T1 and /T2 to first level characters of any AT?  That would increase build choice, and make more players happy at the cost of a little complexity for newbies. If complexity is undesirable, make it a respec exception. Win-win.

[Wavicle]

Just now, Completist said:

I totally agree with you that that is a problematic feature of CoH's design. And equalizing all Tanker /T1s wouldn't fix it! 

 

How about opening up both /T1 and /T2 to first level characters of any AT?  That would increase build choice, and make more players happy at the cost of a little complexity for newbies. If complexity is undesirable, make it a respec exception. Win-win.

That would likely break the game in one or more ways.

[Ultimo]

5 hours ago, Wavicle said:

That would likely break the game in one or more ways.

Well... I don't know that it would BREAK anything... those tier 1 powers are generally not all that powerful... but I don't think that's the way to go.  I'd just rather they make that first power useful to the AT... for each AT.

[Cinnder]

9 hours ago, Completist said:

There should be cooler options, not equivalent ones. Give me a mag 1 stacking hold in /cold, or a short melee cone (3 targets) in /fire, or a cheaper faster non-damaging net arrow, etc. You're stuck with that power, so it should be signature to your choice of secondary; Not just tucked away on hotbar 2 and maybe slotted when you reach the endgame. 

 

Very much this.  When I start a new alt, I like it to feel noticeably different from the last character.  IMO the variance in play between ATs and even power sets within an AT is one of CoX's greatest strengths.  I hate seeing that get diluted by a futile quest for 'balance.'

[Wavicle]

I agree it would be nice if there was more variety to Blaster tier 1 secondaries, but I think those that are Immobs can safely be balanced against each other.

However, if we're going down that road...

I don't think I would complain if Power Thrust got the Repel effect of Sonic Thrust and Ki Push...

[Wavicle]

Need to echo some other comments:
 

@PiecemealThe zoombies are way to fast and damaging. I didn't try these missions out in beta. I'm running it now on a corruptor with my tank buddy and he has no chance to pull them off me in time to save me.

[starro]

3 hours ago, Wavicle said:

Need to echo some other comments:
 

@PiecemealThe zoombies are way to fast and damaging. I didn't try these missions out in beta. I'm running it now on a corruptor with my tank buddy and he has no chance to pull them off me in time to save me.

I hover above the zoombies for about 60 seconds and then they are disarmed and stand there.  They do not even retaliate.  But yes, if they go boom on my controller she is gone quick.

[starro]

I completed both arcs for the first time earlier this week - I am a casual COH player so a little slow getting to the new stuff.

 

I liked the content and found both the hero and villain stories good addition.  I have always loved  the COH lore and look forward to the main story, side stories, reoccurring characters.  Even if Batallion never happens I would like to see more side stories and stories (3-7 missions) with each issue.

 

My few comments

* With each issue Paragon was refreshing the villain groups.... This was much needed for my favorite group - the Vaz.

* As advertised bring a friend, especially for squishie like my fire/weather controller or spider soldier. 

*  This is not old familiar content.  Great new maps on the villain arc.  Holy cow you put some groups tightly packed or in got-yah spots.

*  At one point I got through the content solo at -1x1 settings, but the villain EB's still got me over and over until I phoned a friend. Hopkins......

* Whoa with the ambushes!  Nyah, bring 'em on!

* Man, that is a lot of text.  Before the mission, after the mission text walls.  I liked it but the husband was like 'what are you doing? let's go!'   

* I want to read text, but when it is pew pew time I have even more text to get through with heroes/villains after me.

* those sniper guys!

* I could not get to Dr Vaz in his cell without some funky camera angle as there was too much rubble.  I finished the arc and went back but did not see why Cortex was waving as he would not interact.  I did not connect the dots to see what was going on.   I hope we can see Dr Vaz restrained like Hannibal Lector to make that more dramatic.