What should the aggro cap on Homecoming be?

[fitzsimmons]

I want fold space to work without any cap, any distance requirement, accuracy check or LoS restriction.  Bring 'em all, with a single click.

[BelleSorciere]

1 hour ago, SwitchFade said:

None of this debate should even consider lvl 50 "zerging" gameplay with twinked sets. Load up a lvl 25 team on SOs and it will become very clear that a limit of 17 is very well designed aspect of gameplay, because virtually no AT can even handle 17, let alone 30, 50 or no limit.

A level 25 team will do fine in level 25 content and even zerg it, but also every aspect of the game is valid for discussion here.

[oedipus_tex]

8 minutes ago, fitzsimmons said:

I want fold space to work without any cap, any distance requirement, accuracy check or LoS restriction.  Bring 'em all, with a single click.

 

 

An interesting thing about Fold Space in the current ruleset is that you can teleport or run away from the group you are fighting into a second group, Fold Space to gather them (which works because they are closest to you), and hit them with whatever without them responding, because you've exceeded the cap of 16. This actually works without Fold Space, it's just Fold Space makes it more obvious the second group ignores you.

Edited January 18, 2021 by oedipus_tex

[Snarky]

2 hours ago, SwitchFade said:

I rarely do this, because it's time consuming to do... But I did, just for you guys 😂 I dug through one of the threads @Glacier Peak linked for a post I made and copied it here, as this was the fullest explanation/point I posted on the subject... Heres my old post, because it's relevant, no disrespect @oedipus_tex...

 

 

Removing the aggro cap would not solve any of the issues being discussed. A tank that can afk 17, can afk 200. This was proven on live. The only result of removing the aggro limit would be the return to a tank now being able to control the aggro of everything, thereby eliminating any potential threat to anyone.

 

On live, before the aggro changes, I was able to hold aggro of limitless foes and never be harmed. This made game play for all other players single faceted. My tanks are now actually tougher than live and if they can stand on GM island with 10 GMs pounding away and afk, then there's no number of minions and LTs that could be a threat that the game engine could get within perceptual range.

 

The aggro cap doesn't remove risk, it ADDS risk to all other toons. Anything above 17 will aggro someone ELSE, so every other non-tank type is going to feel the pain. This introduces tactical gameplay. The argument that "we run in, kill one group and move on," is not an issue of aggro, but of spawn design.

 

Let me be clear, spawn size, spawn spacing and spawn density are the issue many mistake for "omg 17 aggro makes game nofunz." Next time you think this is not true, run a map that puts 30 MOBs in close proximity and watch how the tank cannot protect the team. Remove the cap? I can now trivialize all other players.

 

Tanks were the INDIRECT target of an aggro limit. Tanks should NEVER be able to control all the aggro. The target was to balance risk, reward and dynamic gameplay and it did just that. Now, before rushing in everyone needs to be aware of just how many MOBs there are and the very real possibility that a tank can't just be an I win button.

 

This is the same reason controllers had their AoE hold adjusted, a single power or AT could effectively neuter all MOBs.

 

Make no mistake, if you raise or remove the aggro cap all that would result is less risk to everyone, less dynamic gameplay and less for everyone to do. Further, mob spacing, mob size, mob density and more would all have to be adjusted. Even more to the point, any team that didn't have a tank would have a really bad day, as the increased threat that no other AT can handle would instantly dirt nap them.

 

Let's take the "realism" argument and put it in a nice glass case called reality of gameplay: in the real world, that stupid, lumbering unthreatening tank would be ignored as I rapidly Gank support toons. Really, in the real world, defenders and controllers go down first, always.

 

None of this debate should even consider lvl 50 "zerging" gameplay with twinked sets. Load up a lvl 25 team on SOs and it will become very clear that a limit of 17 is very well designed aspect of gameplay, because virtually no AT can even handle 17, let alone 30, 50 or no limit.

 

I'm sorry, but fighting groups of MOBs from factions like council, freaks or even carnies on maps that isolate groups from each other in different rooms and break line of sight is not "solvable" by increasing aggro cap; even if aggro cap were raised, the additional MOBs can't see you.

 

Want proof the aggro cap makes things more dynamic? Go fight banished pantheon at level 50+ where groups of MOBs spawn close to each other and watch how the cap makes everyone a target. Remove that cap? Now, no threat to anyone but the tank. One dimensional gameplay again.

 

So yeah, enjoy textwall! 😁

this should be copied and posted every few entries at this point.  until everyone has read it.  just Warhol this thing through the thread

[oedipus_tex]

18 minutes ago, Snarky said:

this should be copied and posted every few entries at this point.  until everyone has read it.  just Warhol this thing through the thread

 

Please don't do that. It's a fine opinion but there's pretty that's unprovable or debatable about it. I do wonder whether opinion will shift if more servers take the stance that 17 enemies isn't the ideal number for them. If they are willing to adjust that number I can't see any reason they wouldn't also find ways to address a Tanker handling 17 enemies as easily as 40. Aggro management could/should factor into tank play as much as anyone else.  

Edited January 18, 2021 by oedipus_tex

[Haijinx]

The cap makes the game more fun for non Tanks. 

 

It adds an element of risk to what otherwise is a super easy game.   

 

A bigger cap only makes it more fun for Tanks.  

 

 

[Hyperstrike]

On 1/16/2021 at 2:14 PM, oedipus_tex said:

Like the title asks "What should the aggro cap be?"

 

This is a theoretical question that's been thrown around for ages. For a long time it was believed the cap was impractical or impossible to change and the discussion was moot. Recently though the Ouro devs who maintain the core CoX gamecode have discovered the mechanism for determining the aggro cap, a const value buried in the C code. A few servers are now successfully running with a raised cap, or with no cap at all.

 

However, just because you can doesn't mean you should. So there's the question: What should the aggro cap on Homecoming be?

 

(I have my own thoughts but I'd like to hear other players first.)

If I can't herd three instances of the largest map in the game, packed wall-to-wall, floor to ceiling of enemies, SIMULTANEOUSLY, the aggro cap is too restrictive.

[Haijinx]

I'd keep it at 17, but make it so that it was about 3x as easy to aggro extra groups of baddies.  Maybe 5x

 

Thus the team would have to work for their survival. 

 

 

[Sailboat]

IMHO the aggro cap is crucial to the game making any damned sense at all.  Before it was instituted in the first place the game was almost entirely one Tanker and a few Blasters and damn everyone else.  Mass herding also felt stupid and artificial.

 

The cap may not make "sense" logically but it's made the game wonderful instead of a sad frustration.

 

 

[Hyperstrike]

38 minutes ago, Sailboat said:

IMHO the aggro cap is crucial to the game making any damned sense at all.  Before it was instituted in the first place the game was almost entirely one Tanker and a few Blasters and damn everyone else.  Mass herding also felt stupid and artificial.

What?  You've never seen the movie where a stranger walks in, says something, and the next thing you know, every damn person in the town is after them?
 

 

[Haijinx]

8 minutes ago, Hyperstrike said:

What?  You've never seen the movie where a stranger walks in, says something, and the next thing you know, every damn person in the town is after them?
 

 

Yeah but if its just to pound at an invincible tank its boring.

 

If lots of those guys tried to kill the OTHER team members then we'd have a game. 

 

Walk in attract 50 baddies, Only can control aggro on 17 at a time  = fun.  

 

 

[Hyperstrike]

25 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Yeah but if its just to pound at an invincible tank its boring.

 

If lots of those guys tried to kill the OTHER team members then we'd have a game. 

 

Walk in attract 50 baddies, Only can control aggro on 17 at a time  = fun. 

If you say so squishy-boy...

 

[ivanhedgehog]

4 hours ago, Haijinx said:

The cap makes the game more fun for non Tanks. 

 

It adds an element of risk to what otherwise is a super easy game.   

 

A bigger cap only makes it more fun for Tanks.  

 

 

The cap makes it less fun for support. the mobs come in groups much larger than can be agro controlled and the tanks/brutes pretty much just run around killing things while the support wait to rez.not a whole lot of fun for the squishies. There are a LOT of numbers between 17 and no cap but the anti changers seem to just see 2 options. there is a lot of room for discussion. and yes, I made a tank on we have cake with no cap, it was fun, but very slow. A cap of 25 would allow a tank to actually manage agro, not just grab the nearest group and hope that nothing else gets involved.

[Snarky]

Anything that is complex should be treated with respect.  In the LRSF there is a segment of the mission where you need to get a (key?  code?) and it is in a side room, with complex multilevel architecture, and it is PACKED with LB.

 

If one Tank could walk through there and collect all the agro, keep walking (to the beginning of the map?) then maybe get teleported back to team.  Yawn.

 

One Tank or Brute splashes in, absorbing the first wave.  everyone starts killing and you WORK to the objective.  Quickly as possible, but always uses a nod to strategy and tactics.  Because as soon as 18 people show up anyone who is not armored to the yang is in deep yin.

[Sailboat]

9 minutes ago, ivanhedgehog said:

The cap makes it less fun for support. the mobs come in groups much larger than can be agro controlled and the tanks/brutes pretty much just run around killing things while the support wait to rez.

When I played mostly support I felt the exact opposite of what you say.  Pre-cap nobody wanted support and actively insulted support players.

Edited January 19, 2021 by Sailboat

[Haijinx]

10 minutes ago, ivanhedgehog said:

The cap makes it less fun for support. the mobs come in groups much larger than can be agro controlled and the tanks/brutes pretty much just run around killing things while the support wait to rez.not a whole lot of fun for the squishies. There are a LOT of numbers between 17 and no cap but the anti changers seem to just see 2 options. there is a lot of room for discussion. and yes, I made a tank on we have cake with no cap, it was fun, but very slow. A cap of 25 would allow a tank to actually manage agro, not just grab the nearest group and hope that nothing else gets involved.

Wait to rez?  What.

 

There's a huge gulf in potential play between super chocolate easy mode like we have now and roving uncontrolled mobs murdering all squishies instantly. 

 

Like perhaps that FF defender makes the squishies all scrapper tough. 

 

Or those controllers and doms actually strategically use their AOE holds 

 

Etc, Etc.

[Troo]

On 1/16/2021 at 12:14 PM, oedipus_tex said:

Like the title asks "What should the aggro cap be?"

 

This is a theoretical question that's been thrown around for ages. For a long time it was believed the cap was impractical or impossible to change and the discussion was moot. Recently though the Ouro devs who maintain the core CoX gamecode have discovered the mechanism for determining the aggro cap, a const value buried in the C code. A few servers are now successfully running with a raised cap, or with no cap at all.

 

However, just because you can doesn't mean you should. So there's the question: What should the aggro cap on Homecoming be?

 

(I have my own thoughts but I'd like to hear other players first.)

16

 

Playing at 2/8 should have impact much more so 4/8.

Mistakes should have consequences.

Tanks could be using taunt on harder targets rather than relying on inherents or punchvokes.

Support characters could learn how agro caps work and what spillover means as well as how to manage it.

Controllers & Dominators have a place where holds and immobilizes have an impact.

 

I mean seriously, how dumb do mobs have to be? "Let's just keep attacking the big guy we can't hurt while their teammates pick us off"

 

This is just my opinion and may not reflect the wider player base.

[ivanhedgehog]

1 hour ago, Snarky said:

Anything that is complex should be treated with respect.  In the LRSF there is a segment of the mission where you need to get a (key?  code?) and it is in a side room, with complex multilevel architecture, and it is PACKED with LB.

 

If one Tank could walk through there and collect all the agro, keep walking (to the beginning of the map?) then maybe get teleported back to team.  Yawn.

 

One Tank or Brute splashes in, absorbing the first wave.  everyone starts killing and you WORK to the objective.  Quickly as possible, but always uses a nod to strategy and tactics.  Because as soon as 18 people show up anyone who is not armored to the yang is in deep yin.

currently the brute just plows through and anyhting over cap doesnt even attack him. he lets everyone else fend for themselves.

[BelleSorciere]

2 hours ago, ivanhedgehog said:

The cap makes it less fun for support. the mobs come in groups much larger than can be agro controlled and the tanks/brutes pretty much just run around killing things while the support wait to rez.not a whole lot of fun for the squishies. There are a LOT of numbers between 17 and no cap but the anti changers seem to just see 2 options. there is a lot of room for discussion. and yes, I made a tank on we have cake with no cap, it was fun, but very slow. A cap of 25 would allow a tank to actually manage agro, not just grab the nearest group and hope that nothing else gets involved.

A normal 8-person spawn is 16 mobs. Any named mobs (such as named bosses, elite bosses, and AVs/Heroes) add one, for a total of 17. Groups don't come larger. You can impinge on other groups, but this isn't WoW and squishies aren't helpless if they pull aggro. Some "squishies" can tank, even. Every "squishy" has tools to manage mobs in their face. If they didn't, they couldn't solo. 

 

The game shouldn't be about perfect control or perfect DPS or perfect support. There should be gaps, those make the game more fun and exciting.

[Haijinx]

9 hours ago, ivanhedgehog said:

currently the brute just plows through and anyhting over cap doesnt even attack him. he lets everyone else fend for themselves.

Pretty much how I play my tankers

 

And Scrappers

 

And Stalkers

 

Oh yeah, and Brutes

[Haijinx]

8 hours ago, BelleSorciere said:

A normal 8-person spawn is 16 mobs. Any named mobs (such as named bosses, elite bosses, and AVs/Heroes) add one, for a total of 17. Groups don't come larger. You can impinge on other groups, but this isn't WoW and squishies aren't helpless if they pull aggro. Some "squishies" can tank, even. Every "squishy" has tools to manage mobs in their face. If they didn't, they couldn't solo. 

 

The game shouldn't be about perfect control or perfect DPS or perfect support. There should be gaps, those make the game more fun and exciting.

Without any risk, there is no real game.

 

I want gaps, danger, overflow, extra mobs, more ambushes, etc.

[Coyote]

39 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Without any risk, there is no real game.

 

I want gaps, danger, overflow, extra mobs, more ambushes, etc.

 

Me too. But I really like that Fold Space idea. Bring them all, and split the aggro 8-ways. Then the squishies use combat rezzes, and repeat.

[Xenosone]

On 1/16/2021 at 7:50 PM, EmperorSteele said:

One of the devs, I forget if it was 6 or Powerhouse, opined that raising the agro cap actually makes Tankers even LESS desired on a team, because you need fewer Tanks to control all the agro. If one tank can herd an entire room/floor/map, why bother with a 2nd tank, especially when the need for more AoE damage becomes more apparent?
 

I was fairly on the side of raising the cap until I read that, and really have had a really hard time trying to come up with a suitable a rebuttal.

I was on a synapse just recently. 3 tanks. We didnt need 3 tanks at all. 1 tank was just fine so the opposite is actually reality. 

[TheZag]

Let me start out by saying I tank alot and Im pretty happy with the agro cap where it is.

 

I also have 2 thoughts that are kinda in opposition to each other but i think apply to this kind of discussion.

'If it aint broke, dont fix it'

'You wont find something better if you never try anything new'

 

There is a test server and it doesnt always have to be for testing features that are intended to be released.  I would be happy to test things like agro cap stays at 17 but newly taunted mobs dont cause current mobs to peel off for 5 seconds.  Or the cap is 25 but a second group will agro from farther away and taunt/gauntlet have shorter durations.  I would also be happy to test having trash mobs with higher health so there is actually something to tank after the first 10 seconds of a pull.  

 

Changing the agro cap would be a big deal and to just plop in a new number without a rework of other agro and agro management mechanics would be unlikely.

 

And once again, im happy how it is now.  But i would be happy to *test* different configurations on the *test* server.

[arcane]

People acting like an AT’s usefulness to a team is a relevant metric anymore is a bit questionable. 99% of the game is very easy with any combination of 8 players already.