Weekly Discussion 80: More Hard Mode or New Zones & Missions?

[chi1701]

52 minutes ago, EdgeOfDreams said:

The main problem I see with trying to create a harder mode is that the way you beat most existing challenges in CoH is already very simple. Either you have enough mitigation + enough damage output to win, or you don't. There are very few challenges that can't be beaten by giving your character bigger numbers. The exceptions are mostly Incarnate Trials, a few other trials and TFs, and the requirements for certain badges.

 

So, if "hard mode" will mostly consist of spawning more enemies or giving enemies better stats, I don't think anyone will really find it interesting or satisfying. Instead, I'd like to see more new content that includes complex challenges or more badges added to existing content with requirements that force you to get creative to earn them.

That is is exactly what I would like.

[Darmian]

3 hours ago, Panthonca7034 said:

Time to dust off the unused "Praetorian PvP Zone" that I saw in PChat and start finding a way to implement it (falls under new content)

As an advocate for more and better Praetorian material I agree with almost all your post except this one.  Dear Stars, no!  A thousand times no!

[Zepp]

Hmmm... thinking about this from a priorities perspective.

1. Praetorian story arcs in First Ward and Night Ward
2. PEAT & PEAT story arc(s)
3. Sentinel fix
4. Manipulation/Assault AT
5. AT-internal set balance
6. New sets
7. Increasing mob levels in specific zone areas
8. New solo & group high difficulty missions that do not have associated badges

Reasoning?

Goldside is undeveloped and forcing people to go red or blue past a certain level is kinda creating forced refugees from other dimensions. Including Praetorian arcs in those two zones would be appropriate and make Praetorians feel more welcome in the CoX multiverse. Adding a Praetorian Epic Archetype fits this reasoning as well.

Next, Sentinels don't have the protections to justify their lack of damage, or enough damage to justify their low protections. In addition, the inherent mechanic is weak (combining the two effects would make it reasonable), and they feel like they are lacking a true role.

 

Manipulation and assault sets are my two favorite sets, but each only exist in one specific archetype. By having a Manipulation/Assault AT you would create a unique feel and provide a wide range of customizability with recycled powersets.

 

After that, balance and completing unfinished sets is needed, but more work-intensive than the previous issues (although the Goldside expansion may be a tad work-intensive, its high payoff still pushes it to the top).

 

Difficulty adjustments cater to a vocal minority while possibly having harsh repercussions. These will need a lot of social engineering to deal with in a responsible manner, which is why I put them at the bottom.

[Take One]

For new content, something which could be dropped in almost seamlessly, would be more tip missions.

They wouldn't even have to be tied to the morality system, they could be stand-alone tips that lead to some interesting mission which your character runs into on their own and decide to investigate on their own. It would give a greater feeling of autonomy instead of the feeling of working for different contacts most of whom you don't care about.

There could be different flavors of new tip missions dropping depending on your current morality, or they could all be neutral.

New tip missions could even lead into short arcs of 2-3 missions, with a bonus at the end, to make them more attractive for players.

Naturally badges would help draw people to doing them, too.

The best thing about it is that we could add them to all levels of play, in every zone, for every player, with what I believe to be a minimum of fuss. The tip mission system is already there, ready to be modified. Red-side already drop special tips for unlocking Strike Forces or the Pandora's Box contact so clearly it's possible to add tips that aren't connected to the morality system, and which leads to other missions, or even to other contacts.

And as they are stand-alone missions, or maybe shorter arcs, they can be created much easier than for example the latest new Freakshow/Vahzilok arcs - great as they may be - which was a huge job if I understood the devs' blog correctly. Even so, they can introduce unique mobs and game concepts, if those are available - perhaps to test them out before they are released into the open world or used in a greater arc.

My personal love for tip missions comes from that they make me feel like the active agent in my character's story and not just a follower or someone who reacts to what other people are doing. I'm the one deciding to follow up on a lead, not some contact with a vague hunch about the Skulls again.

Edited December 7, 2020 by Take One

[Darmian]

Hmm.  Tip missions adapted from the best of the AE material? Doesn't have to be "Lore Heavy" just not so far out there it's Elseworlds or What If...

So you would be looking at a tip "arc" of no more than 5 missions , done and dusted.  And I realize that as someone who doesn't know how to "only" write a 5 mission slot I've instantly disqualified anything I've done, I STILL say this could work.

 

Parameters. Here's the Tip template.  Give us up to 5 missions involving X group with Y maguffin and so on.

 

And adapting the tip missions so that for example if I have the choice of hero or vigilante then choosing one of those could generate a follow on tip mission? (a) Send the miscreant to prison or (b) break his arm and send him packing, which leads to (c) vengeance on you!

Edited December 7, 2020 by Darmian

[Take One]

You're reading my mind again, Darmian!

 

Get out of my heeeeead!

[Carnifax]

In terms of how easy* they'd be to implement

 

 

Allow Difficulty to go up to +5x12

Extend the range of other arcs by 5 or 10 levels. Is there any reason Croatoa, Striga, Tina etc etc can't be extended by at least 5 levels to give us more content options (and stop us outlevelling them). 

New tips from AE missions sounds like a nice plan in terms of quickly adding new content. 

Add more level 50 arcs along the lines of Number 6s. Always though it was weird that the Marchand arc was the "fallout" from Mag trials yet was level 30ish. Again these could be "pulled" from good AE arcs.

Fix the "boring" TFs like Cit and Synapse (that's lower content though)

Adding content for zones like Kal Wharf.

 

*standard code rant applies

[Blastit]

How would increasing difficulty by further increasing enemy level work? What does that do to debuffs, crowd control, defences and to-hit tresholds?

[nihilii]

4 hours ago, EdgeOfDreams said:

The main problem I see with trying to create a harder mode is that the way you beat most existing challenges in CoH is already very simple. Either you have enough mitigation + enough damage output to win, or you don't. There are very few challenges that can't be beaten by giving your character bigger numbers. The exceptions are mostly Incarnate Trials, a few other trials and TFs, and the requirements for certain badges.

 

So, if "hard mode" will mostly consist of spawning more enemies or giving enemies better stats, I don't think anyone will really find it interesting or satisfying. Instead, I'd like to see more new content that includes complex challenges or more badges added to existing content with requirements that force you to get creative to earn them.

I'm basically the opposite. Expanding reputation, more bosses per group on optional hard++, tying merit rewards to already existing (enemies buffed, players debuffed) options, adding new enemies with better powers to old factions would make it interesting and satisfying for me.

 

Special creative mechanics akin to what is seen in iTrials, where X players (or Y amount of preplanning) is required, have little appeal to me. I'm not interested in the social challenge of coordinating other players, but in the personal challenge of toying with numbers and having the right execution to push the bar as far as I can.

 

I'd assume CoH should be biaised towards people who like "very simple" ways to beat challenges, because... that's how the entire game is built. So why would one play the game if they're not satisfied with the gameplay? But, admittedly, there are many reasons to think of. Liking the costumes, the superhero theme, the personalisation, perhaps the elusive feel, or even inertia; and with Apex/TinM and then iTrials (casual as they may be) opening a moat for players who prefer raid-type mechanics. The great strength of the game is in how much freedom we have to approach things, and we end up with players like you and I who both cannot imagine the other would enjoy what they enjoy. 😄

[Darmian]

1 hour ago, nihilii said:

I'd assume CoH should be biaised towards people who like "very simple" ways to beat challenges, because... that's how the entire game is built

I'd posit that that is correlation and not causation. Original devs being subject to getting as much "content" out as possible to feed the grind machine that a subscription business demands in order to retain incoming subs means that is how the game is built, and that's what you end up with and are used to. Of course it's more nuanced than that but not a lot IMO. You get genuinely creative devs fighting against the dictum of "how little can we give and get away with without losing income?" that is dictated to them by the paymasters.

 

We're in a "can't please all the people all of the time" moment here I think!

[Carnifax]

1 hour ago, Blastit said:

How would increasing difficulty by further increasing enemy level work? What does that do to debuffs, crowd control, defences and to-hit tresholds?

They get affected by the Purple Patch. So debuffs become less useful, crowd control durations become much less etc. https://archive.paragonwiki.com/wiki/Purple_Patch has a table showing the impact. At +4 debuffs and controls are 48% effectiveness. At +5 that goes to 30%. Damage is also affected in the same way. 

 

 

[UltraAlt]

16 hours ago, GM ColdSpark said:

 

This week it's a discussion on the pros and cons of developing more Hard Mode options for existing content vs. developing new zones and missions

 

Things to think about:

• 1) What you think would bring the most to the community at large and why?
• 2) What is reasonable to expect given limited resources?
• 3) Is there an order in which you'd do things?

Since the discussion is apparently about "hard mode" and why "hard mode" development is better than developing new zones and missions, then I guess my input is not really wanted here. I guess that's a con. (I'm taking the "versus" to mean "instead of" in this situation).

 

The Pro would be end-gamers might like it until they get bored with it and burn out.

 

1) a) Diversification of development

I know it seems like diluting development at various areas across the board will take longer for anything to really stand out, but what one player wants, another player could care less about.

b) DEVs doing what they are interested in as they will be more likely to feel good about putting more time into doing it.

c) DEVs suiting up as Giant Monsters and AVs and attacking Paragon City (doesn't anyone else remember how epic that was back-in-the-day?)

d) More community events like Tanker Tuesdays, etc. aka simulate the community through community involvement (as we have here for example with a weekly discussion topic)

 

2)  Letting Devs work on what they feel good about working on is reasonable.

 

3) It's always easier to pick the low-hanging fruit. I would go with that to begin with.

[Gulbasaur]

I'd like to see mission modifiers akin to the Flashback/Task Force system where you can add buffs, debuffs etc.

 

GW2's Fractal system uses something similar - add temporary powers to enemies, make them explode on death, give bonuses for stacking/not stacking, give enemies a global damage proc etc. Nothing too overpowered, but enough to make you have to think about how to approach an encounter.

Give players an option to add one, two or three mods to a mission as leader with rewards that scale appropriately. They're generated randomly or on a timer (so you can't just reset missions until you get one you like).

 

Things like

• Players get a -res and -def debuff, which is cancelled by staying within range of each other.
• Players get a -res and -def debuff, which is cancelled by staying away from each other
• Enemies explode on death if not mezzed
• Enemies have a small +def +res aura for allies so AoE tank and spank is less effective.
• Enemies have a small +dmg +tohit aura so AoE tank and spank is less effective. 
• Enemies have a small debuff aura that stacks X number of times
• Damage/debuff procs on enemy powers (like the incarnate procs)
• Enemies have a damage patch/aura that triggers at X% health meaning knockback and range have more value.
• Players are debuffed for standing still too long
• Players repel each other
• Enemies repel each other

etc etc 

Basically, things that mean players can't autopilot into large mobs and have to adjust tactics to the mission. 

Edited December 7, 2020 by Gulbasaur

[Yomo Kimyata]

With respect to "vs.", if the question is which would I rather have the devs spend time on, then my answer is definitely new or adapted content.

 

RE: difficulty.  Whatever gets done here, please do *not* increase any rewards.  If people want to fight x16 mobs, or want to fight +8 minions, power to them.  But not one single point of inf or xp over +4/x8.  There are already too many lollipops, and I'd rather not the devs waste time so that someone can farm council maps more efficiently.

 

RE: content.  I haven't come even close to exploring all the content that is already out there.  I'd rather see old zones repurposed than create new zones.  I'd rather see mechanics to allow reds and blues to run the same (but morally different) missions than create new missions.  And I definitely want that mission where you have to find hostages in a Oranbega map with Malta as enemies ported redside.  That s*** is *evil*.

[Lockpick]

 

Things to think about:

• What you think would bring the most to the community at large and why?
  • Leveraging AE and the players to create the content with HC Team content approval for rewards seems the best route
  • More zones is probably not a good idea as we have a ton of zones that get limited use now
    • Khalisti Wharf is an exception and might be nice to add content here
• What is reasonable to expect given limited resources?
  • It is hard to say as I don't know the limits of the team, but it seems to me that the easiest path to start would be to add some additional options for the notoriety (+4, +10, No Minions, Bosses Only, etc.) and challenge settings (No Incarnates, No Judgement, No Alpha, Bosses Only, No Minions)
• Is there an order in which you'd do things?
  • Update Notoriety Settings
  • Update Challenge Settings
  • Reward Rationalization
  • Update AE to allow players to create the content
  • Add a process to have the HC Team approve the new content
  • Add the content to a "Canon" state, so it gets full rewards that traditional content receives

 

My solution (provided previously in another thread):

• HC Team would adjust AE to add more tags and filters, so players can find appropriate content
  • Clean up AE and disable or tag missions where the creators are no longer active and the mission is not getting traction
• HC Team volunteer would create Community AE mission contests with the help of community volunteers
• HC Team would create reward badges and and provide reward merits for players creating and testing content to incentivize players
• HC Team volunteers would take the content that is lore based and fits the parameters of what the HC team believe are appropriate from a complexity, lore, and difficulty standpoint and tag it as Canon content
  • HC Team would set parameters that limit the ability to game the system for inappropriate rewards
    • Only provide rewards at completion of the mission
    • Ensure that there are different enemy types in each mission and sets of missions, so if doesn't become a defacto farm
    • Other parameters as needed
    • Maybe have a monthly contest for canon story arcs that are accepted as Canon content and have quarterly Task Forces added as Canon content; that gives you 4 new TFs per year and 12 new story arcs per year in addition to additional content that may be selected as Canon Content by the HC Team
      • Maybe do something similar for Incarnate content
      • HC Team could have zone, level, or enemy faction specific content requests for the players to create content to add content where it may be lacking
• Once content is tagged as Canon it becomes HC Team content, so the creator can no longer make adjustments not approved by the HC Team
• Give Canon content the same rewards as TFs and Incarnate missions (i.e. reward merits, threads, shards, Astral Merits, EMPs. etc.) as appropriate
  • Balance the rewards based on appropriate reward levels and adjust as needed
  • If you find that everyone is playing the Council AE mission over and over because they are a weak enemy, lower the rewards
• The HC Team can also make some of the AE Content WSTs to get players to play it
• Have the player created content be accessible through contacts / radio that are in various zones as opposed to the AE
  • Example: I create an AE mission as a portal mission in PI.  I tag the mission as PI.  Once the mission is approved by the HC Team as Canon content the mission can be selected via the radio and points me to a portal.  Once I enter the portal I am basically in AE.

 

These adjustments will provide many benefits:

• It should be relatively easy to implement because most of the work is focused on improvements to existing tools and leveraging the community to create and test the content
• It should be relatively easy to maintain (HC Team may have to balance rewards occasionally if the data calls for it)
• Content of many different levels of complexity will be created that should alleviate the concern of players that think the game is to easy because they will be able to play the hard mode content they crave
• You will never run out of new content, which is always the issue with a MMO
• People will likely play the content because they are getting the rewards they need for progression
• It will bring the community closer together because we will be working together to create and test content
• The HC Team will not have to worry about creating content and can focus on incremental adjustments, bug fixes, new power sets, etc.
• Players will be able to more effectively "own" their play experience by creating content they enjoy (of course it will still have to pass the HC Team gating criteria to get full rewards)

 

[Doc_Scorpion]

6 hours ago, Carnifax said:

Is there any reason Croatoa, Striga, Tina etc etc can't be extended by at least 5 levels to give us more content options (and stop us outlevelling them). 

Yes.  The XP lock.

[Carnifax]

26 minutes ago, Doc_Scorpion said:

Yes.  The XP lock.

What's this then? 

[Coyotedancer]

41 minutes ago, Carnifax said:

What's this then? 

 

I suspect they just mean "You can turn off XP to keep from outleveling contacts"

[chi1701]

7 hours ago, Carnifax said:

In terms of how easy* they'd be to implement

 

 

Allow Difficulty to go up to +5x12

Extend the range of other arcs by 5 or 10 levels. Is there any reason Croatoa, Striga, Tina etc etc can't be extended by at least 5 levels to give us more content options (and stop us outlevelling them). 

New tips from AE missions sounds like a nice plan in terms of quickly adding new content. 

Add more level 50 arcs along the lines of Number 6s. Always though it was weird that the Marchand arc was the "fallout" from Mag trials yet was level 30ish. Again these could be "pulled" from good AE arcs.

Fix the "boring" TFs like Cit and Synapse (that's lower content though)

Adding content for zones like Kal Wharf.

 

*standard code rant applies

Increasing mob sizes and level wont change anything, players will still run the same fire ae missions due them tailoring their damage resistance and defence to specific damage out put, radio missions runnners will still prioritise council over every other mob if possible. But, x12 wont work, having more mobs will break current agro cap which would need to be increased to deal with higher number of them.

[The_Warpact]

Couldn't enemies scale to lvl? Then have a slider if you wanted to increase the difficulty from there?

 

I would love to do a Posi 2 on my big guy vs a lvl 54+ Dr.Vahz AV.

[thunderforce]

Hard mode: get rid of the incarnate level shift altogether. No, really. This doesn't affect players who want "easy mode"; you can still fight -1s. (I know, this isn't going to happen, but also it is almost certainly the single most straightforward change which would give higher endgame difficulty - and without changing the gameplay in any respect).

 

As partial penance for flogging my favourite dead horse, a serious suggestion about more content: one of the games I played during the interregnum was Star Trek Online. The AE-equivalent ("Foundry") there was more sophisticated; where in CoX the scope for originality is custom enemy groups and the accompanying text, with the actual mission mechanics coming from a very limited pool (limited to around issue 4, I guess?), in STO - although the tools will seem relatively familiar - the variety of player-created missions was considerably greater. (Crucially, it had map editing tools).

 

Of course, this could be a great deal of work; but also, done right, it could realise the original vision for AE. Many STO Foundry missions were just as fun to play as the game's built-in content. Even getting the later issue mission mechanics into AE would considerably widen the scope of what could be done.

 

(Sadly, I use the past tense; I gather it was shut down in late 2019.)

[ScarySai]

Both, but if I had to pick one, its new content.

 

I love the freaklok stuff and I love the Battalion that we never got.

 

Remember: Incarnates were basically balanced with these insanely strong factions in mind, without them - we just roflstomp non-incarnates for the most part. Having a foe that could challenge us on that level would be fun. Especially for solo min/max types like myself.

 

Another thing I'd like to see is a slight rework of the paper mission system to essentially let you pick what faction you want to fight, scaled up to you. I dislike how Council lose all the things that made them interesting in the 20s-30s when you hit the 40s, and occasionally miss beating up the family, Lost or Vahzilok, at times.

Edited December 7, 2020 by ScarySai

[PeregrineFalcon]

More hard mode? No.

More zones? No.

New missions? Sort of.

 

The story arc missions should exempt players down to their max level, just like TF's and Agent Hassel's Safeguard missions do, so that players can keep playing the storylines without worrying about out-leveling them and without having to deal with the Ouroborus and its problems. Suddenly people have a ton of new content that they've probably never seen that they can run.

 

Fill Kalisti Warf with tons of level 50 content. Take it from the AE if you have to, and if the game engine allows it.

 

Make the Shadow Shard Zones co-op zones. Fix up the lame geometry problems that prevent some AoE's from working in the Chantry and Storm Palace. Add more "radio/paper" repeatable missions to the zones. Add a capstone mission to those repeatables, like the safeguards/mayhem missions.

 

Adding a repeatable mission contact to each of the hazard zones, like Meg in The Hollows, along with a different capstone mission specific to that zone, also seems like a lot of extra content for less effort. Perhaps that guy near the zone door that warns us about how dangerous the zone is could be the repeatable mission contact.

[BZRKR]

17 hours ago, MidnightClubPatron said:

Perhaps you could echo it? I realize things can start to get messy when you have a 'present' day contact giving missions in the past, but considering how few missions actually go in there perhaps it wouldn't be that much of a bother.

This gives me an idea!

What if we used Ouroboros to travel to FUTURE versions of the hazard zones where high level enemies threaten to take over unless we can shift events in that given timeline? Stuff like:

A Shivan Meteor landed in Boomtown, which became the center of their conquered territory. Missions could be given by a rag tag group of Vanguard and Hero Corps survivors.

The Sky Raiders have acquired Praetorian IDF technology and used their strength to take over the whole of Terra Volta for themselves. What are they up to with a whole city's worth of power in their grasp?

Working with their Rikti allies, Arachnos scientists have unlocked a way to control the Hydra and have been working to mutate them into something even more horrific. Waves of stronger and stranger Hydra are set to boil forth from the Abandoned Sewers.

 

[Nemu]

Where difficulty really gets diluted is in team play.

 

I'd like content that requires a bit more strategy and doesn't get overpowered by spreadsheet warriors crunching numbers to come up with optimal builds. The latter has made it so that most teams can rush into anything and everything and come out on top 90% of the time. Even if this hard mode of +5/12 gets implemented it's just a matter of math before people come up with builds and team compositions that make it trivial.

 

Let's use brains to play and not numbers. Mob placement means nothing and there is very little penalty/consequence to people derping into a room of death and aggroing 2+3 groups because they don't pay attention to their aggro radius. Many people play this game today without really learning how to play this game. I'd like to see missions design that really teach/enforce fundamentals such as pulling/using line of sight/aggro radius/target prioritization, etc... And, unpopular opinion here, really punish players for not paying attention and being reckless. Example of this already exists in the game in the Posi 1 TF with the circle ambush.

 

Make failures mean something. Yesterday I was on a Moonfire and Dr. Todd died because people didn't pay attention. "Oh well, next mission!" While I appreciate the leniency I would like to see content where such failure means you fail.

Edited December 7, 2020 by Nemu