"The Game is not Balanced around IO's"..... should it be?

[Erratic1]

4 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

If the underlying issue remains why would they?  

Exactly. Some powersets are endurance hungry, even with no recharge bonuses driving more attacks.  Other powersets alleviate that problem but it would limiting to tell people using Dark Armor or Titan Weapons (or heaven help you, Dark Armor with  Titan Weapons), find some other build. Other sets have other issues--difficulty in reaching defensive or resist caps. The IOs that address those issue are less universally desirable but only by a fraction (since some ATs aren't really into capping defense/resistances without Herculean effort).

[SwitchFade]

So, uh... Derail!

 

I'm a bit sad the peak is 1k players 😭

 

I hope we continue to climb!

[Greycat]

1 hour ago, Erratic1 said:

You are never that new, not even in the tutorials, where you have police connections and are directed to deal with problems and are not someone who just suddenly realized they can fantastic things (evidenced in particular by the fact you have a superhero name even).

... you assume. I have plenty of characters with only a name, no real police connections 'til they've gotten noticed street sweeping (leveling a bit and eventually being pointed to a contact.) So, yeah, character wise, I do end up with characters who suddenly realized they can do fantastic things - or can't, and are just driven to go up and punch a Hellion.

[Erratic1]

4 minutes ago, Greycat said:

... you assume. I have plenty of characters with only a name, no real police connections 'til they've gotten noticed street sweeping (leveling a bit and eventually being pointed to a contact.) So, yeah, character wise, I do end up with characters who suddenly realized they can do fantastic things - or can't, and are just driven to go up and punch a Hellion.

No, I do not assume. The tutorials have a fixed script. You start the game with a contact who is authorized to send you to do things. You may choose to not talk to that contact but he is in fact there. You may skip the tutorial but if you did them you are being talked to by npcs who recognize who you are.

 

Your character's backstory is just that--backstory. But as a played character, the moment you enter the game, the surrounding narrative is that you are a hero. 

 

[Spaghetti Betty]

Just wanna throw in my 2 inf here. I have fully tricked out characters that are nigh-invincible, and some that just have SOs at all levels. So I guess that puts me somewhere in the middle?

 

I gotta say, as a long time player, I'm actually really happy with the game balance that we have now. If I wanna blow up some stuff, I can switch to one of my tricked out 50s that require no thought whatsoever, because I've put in the time and resources to make those characters really good, which in and of itself I consider a skill check. Maybe an easier skill check nowadays, but not something instantly achievable by a less knowledgeable player.

 

I also have a group of friends I've been playing with overnight in a small group of usually not-50s. All vets of the game, but as far as I can tell, they don't bother too much with IOs. Those groups tend to be more old school. One tank pulling a majority of groups around a corner so that the rest of the group can handle them soundly. Yeah, it's not the streamrolling I experience on a level 50 god, but ends up being fun and engaging, despite the fact that all of the characters we're playing have flaws, don't do a crapton of damage, or die in a couple of hits.

 

I also have a coworker trying out the game for the first time. He landed on a warshade, and I made a controller. Could you imagine this duo trying to go through the game 15 years ago? Oh my god. but it's doable now because the game is balanced for all levels of play. I allow him to take as much time as he needs to to learn the game, and I can also teach him some oldhead strategies for dealing with difficult groups. If the game was balanced for IOs, it would be impossible for us to progress,

 

I enjoy all of these methods of play, and the fact that both are viable attributes to the balance of the game. I wouldn't change a thing. Well, ok, I think the one thing I would change is the way the game teaches you about itself, since I feel like that's a big factor of how we look at game balance, but I think that's another topic for another day.

 

Also, since we're talking about IOs and difficulty, I'm interested in putting together a group that can complete a +4 Katie TF.

[Greycat]

5 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

No, I do not assume. The tutorials have a fixed script. You start the game with a contact who is authorized to send you to do things. You may choose to not talk to that contact but he is in fact there. You may skip the tutorial but if you did them you are being talked to by npcs who recognize who you are.

 

Your character's backstory is just that--backstory. But as a played character, the moment you enter the game, the surrounding narrative is that you are a hero.

Nope. The tutorials are not mandatory, and I can run around for several levels being completely unrecognized until I've gained some levels. No NPCs "recognize" me - which lets me *get* recognized naturally (the NPCs you save do, generically, thank you. Not "OMG, it's you!" but "Thanks, they're always trying to steal my purse.") 

 

Which gives a natural path for the level 5-ish "someone wants to talk to you," since, well, you rescuing people would be noticed (or talked about by the rescuees.)

 

So, yes, you're starting with an assumption on what others' characters are doing. And the game gives me the flexibility to go against that assumption. Heck, I've had characters who just run SG created missions in AE and never really touch a "real" contact, but get a full story arc (or several) through that and RP.

 

(You also ignore starting redside, in which case I'm definitely not a hero.)

[Erratic1]

1 minute ago, Leetdeth said:

I enjoy all of these methods of play, and the fact that both are viable attributes to the balance of the game. I wouldn't change a thing. Well, ok, I think the one thing I would change is the way the game teaches you about itself, since I feel like that's a big factor of how we look at game balance, but I think that's another topic for another day.

 

Emphasis on the above. I lean against IOs raining from the sky. Not because I am an elite player (I am not) with tricked out Veteran level 500+ characters smashing all things in sight, but rather because there are indeed many modes of playing CoH and it is perfectly fine for the different modes to exist and to not cater to all players. 

 

I will not say I have not visited a AE farm, but on the whole it is not something I am going to do because beyond watching a tricked out character dominate the nastiest stuff someone could dream up for a while, I find it boring. And the material difference between that and story arcs set to +4/8? Beyond story, not much (which is why my tolerance for that while higher is not much higher). But to people who enjoy doing such, or at least can tolerate it? More power to them. Some people are not "build" people, not wanting to get into the math and work to try to make IOs work for them. That's fine too. And that, in particularly, is why I lean against IOs raining from the sky because for some it is going to be the type of push which is a turn off. As is, you interact with IOs if you want but nothing really pushes you to do so.

[Galaxy Brain]

48 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

Exactly. Some powersets are endurance hungry, even with no recharge bonuses driving more attacks.  Other powersets alleviate that problem but it would limiting to tell people using Dark Armor or Titan Weapons (or heaven help you, Dark Armor with  Titan Weapons), find some other build. Other sets have other issues--difficulty in reaching defensive or resist caps. The IOs that address those issue are less universally desirable but only by a fraction (since some ATs aren't really into capping defense/resistances without Herculean effort).

TBH more sets than those have End issues, theyre just the most egregious lol. I find endurance management is just kind of this weird stopgap a lot of people need to work around to the point of it being kind of questionable, but thats just me

[Erratic1]

8 minutes ago, Greycat said:

Nope. The tutorials are not mandatory, and I can run around for several levels being completely unrecognized until I've gained some levels. No NPCs "recognize" me - which lets me *get* recognized naturally (the NPCs you save do, generically, thank you. Not "OMG, it's you!" but "Thanks, they're always trying to steal my purse.")[/quote]

And you do that dressed as an office worker who just developed powers somewhere between slide 123 and 124 of the PowerPoint presentation and decided, "You know, this is tedious...let me go outside and chase down some gang members I would otherwise have avoided until now. Gee, I hope I can shrug off bullets."? And you start the game with a mundane name and street clothing, only changing costume and adopting a superhero name after having run the streets?

 

Hardcore, but if that is your cup of tea, so be it and I more than accept you actually play as someone who literally just got their powers.

 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Erratic1

[Erratic1]

1 minute ago, Galaxy Brain said:

TBH more sets than those have End issues, theyre just the most egregious lol. I find endurance management is just kind of this weird stopgap a lot of people need to work around to the point of it being kind of questionable, but thats just me

I was not trying to give an exhaustive list, just provide examples.

[Yomo Kimyata]

I'm going to go a little against the grain here.  I find it hard to believe that a significant percentage of the posters here, or even of the players on HC, are unaware of the invention system.  Yes, there should be more teaching tools, but I've never seen even the newbiest newby choose to go the TO/DO/SO route by choice.  Instead they are seeking the funds to go the IO route (which I am happy to provide).  If one chooses to use SOs rather than IOs, that is probably a question of economics or personal challenge.

 

In my opinion, for high level (35+) content, yes, I would like to see new material designed for "stronger than SO" builds.  

 

 

[CrudeVileTerror]

I know about IOs.

I know about the market.

 

I also know that a lot of the players who I've personally introduced to the game, or just newbies I've bumped in to while rolling new characters and getting the Tutorial Badges . . . THEY do not know.  And they look at it, and it's intimidating and confusing as hell, and they don't WANT to look at it.

Sure.  Making it more accessible is a noble goal.  But many of us aren't here fighting for ourselves.  We're here advocating for those players who aren't frequenting the forums.  Who aren't doing web searches for guides and outside tutorials.

We're advocating on behalf of people who just want to play the game.

 

And so, yeah.  Unless the Homecoming Team wants to step up and overhaul the Enhancement System, the auction system, and all the in-game tutorials . . . we absolutely should continue to balance the game around the lowest common denominator.

And even then?  Why bother?  It doesn't hurt anyone to continue to offer easy modes of play for those who enjoy them.

 

And, at the same time, develop NEW -optional- features for those players who want to be challenged to find their challenges.

 

Having the easiest end getting easier, and the hardest end getting harder is a solid plan for expansion, as far as I'm concerned.

[Yomo Kimyata]

28 minutes ago, CrudeVileTerror said:

 

 

I also know that a lot of the players who I've personally introduced to the game, or just newbies I've bumped in to while rolling new characters and getting the Tutorial Badges . . . THEY do not know.  And they look at it, and it's intimidating and confusing as hell, and they don't WANT to look at it.

Sure.  Making it more accessible is a noble goal.  But many of us aren't here fighting for ourselves.  We're here advocating for those players who aren't frequenting the forums.  Who aren't doing web searches for guides and outside tutorials.

We're advocating on behalf of people who just want to play the game.

 

Hmm, my experience has differed, but that's cool.  I have not brought anyone completely new into the game, but I spend a fair amount of time talking to self-professed newbies when I'm giving away inf.  I don't hear from them that they are intimidated or confused  by the IO system or that they don't want to look at it and just use SOs.  They have no idea what TOs or DOs or SOs are, but they know IOs.  I hear from them that they want to figure out a way to afford "the good stuff".  Now, that is certainly a biased sample set since generally I am giving away inf, but it is indeed my sample set.

 

I hear your concern that you are not fighting for yourself.  But I have to wonder, based on my personal experience, if the theoretical people you are fighting for really exist in large numbers, or if it is rather a general moral construct that "we *should* base this around the lowest common denominator, the mythological person who only knows how SOs work but can't quite grasp the small stepto the world of IOs.  I don't know, honestly.

 

Just my observations and opinions, and as always, yours may vary!

[CrudeVileTerror]

Not meaning to escalate, but calling them "mythological" seems pretty disingenuous from my perspective, especially considering I'm fairly sure I've seen you reply to people expressing these personal experiences right here in the forums.  And I'll certainly cop to a bias too; I'm a roleplayer, and I primarily introduce roleplayers to this game.  It's an easy sell when they see what the game's designed to offer in the form of customization, personalization, and the promise of agency (at least with things like AE or group activities.  There's room for improvement in plenty of content).

Is it really so daunting to accept that there are people who are actively playing this game, but loathe things like the market or the invention system?  Even if you don't come across them in your own sphere, do you feel it's worthwhile harming their play experience?  Do you genuinely gain anything from making the game less accessible?

I'd like to see more effort dedicated to further improving accessibility, but I'm aware of the limited nature of the Dev Team and their resources.  In the absence of that, though, I certainly don't want to see those limited resources used on development that negatively impacts the players I enjoy spending my time with here.

[Doomguide2005]

I think the game should be balanced around SO builds.  That said I think it's equally important to account for 'high'-end IO builds when designing content.  And the primary manner that should be done is through the notoriety settings.  

     And while my knowledge of post i22/i23 Incarnate trials is sketchy owing to life events I feel it's very likely there are in fact teams comprised solely of SO builds that could handle and complete the hardest content out there.  When a team starts hitting the caps on all sorts of game limits it doesn't matter if that's with team buffs (SO only build) or primarily via high-end IO builds, the results are the same.

[Replacement]

17 hours ago, SwitchFade said:

So, uh... Derail!

 

I'm a bit sad the peak is 1k players 😭

 

I hope we continue to climb!

Don't want to spend too much on the derail, but did want to point out that's one shard hitting 1k at high time. Total concurrent count (unsure if/how costume creator figures into this) is over 2600.

[Troo]

@Galaxy Brain Yes, IOs are widely used and there are few reasons to ignore this fact.

 

Q: Should the game be balanced around IOs? A: Sure why not.

 

At one point we had Training Origin, Dual Origin, and Single Origin enhancements.

Then enhancements were diversified and player crafting... things evolved to allow for more variety.

Players were rewarded for participating in that variety with some easily attainable benefits.

Yes, folks figure out ideal bonuses and setups while variety fades just a little.

 

Would balancing around IOs have an impact? Sure. Maybe that's a good thing.

Removing the Rule of 5 might also allow more specialization and variety.. maybe that would be a good thing as well.

 

Identifying areas to address while avoiding the pitfalls of power-creep is challenging stuff. Please don't base these thing on the whims of a heavily manipulated market system. 🙂 

[Brutal Justice]

Remove base buffs and pay to win buffs.  Then hard cap non tanker archetypes at 40% defense.  

 

Balanced.  

 

You can still min max with IOs and be crazy strong.  You just can’t tank everything with your blaster and make half the archetypes pointless.  Let’s be honest, all the other archetypes pointless.  

[Infinitum]

57 minutes ago, Brutal Justice said:

Remove base buffs and pay to win buffs.  Then hard cap non tanker archetypes at 40% defense.

Hmmm not sure about that one - if you did that blasters, defenders etc should get status protection in return - and scrappers stalkers brutes would need more than 40% as well.

[Brutal Justice]

22 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Hmmm not sure about that one - if you did that blasters, defenders etc should get status protection in return - and scrappers stalkers brutes would need more than 40% as well.

There is no reason they should other than you want it.  They didn’t have it for how many years and did just fine?   

 

Possibly brutes and khelds because they somewhat fill tanker roles.  Not scrappers or stalkers.  They are plenty durable with 40% defense.   It’s the same exact logic as them having lower res caps.  

[Kala]

I don't think it's necessarily an issue. The game shouldn't need to be balanced around SOs or IOs at all. You should be able to set your difficulty to what you can handle, and the better your build, team, etc, the higher you set it.

 

This adjustable difficulty is core to making a game where no one really cares about game balance. You don't need a balanced game in the first place if anyone can run at an appropriate difficulty for their situation.

 

The larger problem is this system is failing when the default becomes +4x8 and even that is still too easy. I'm not sure if allowing a higher level adjustment would fix the issue, or if fully optimized builds break the game mechanics entirely in ways that adding levels can't adequately resolve.

 

But if there is any real answer to the question of how the game should be balanced, I think we need to take a look at the difficulty system, something that should prevent us from even asking that question in the first place, and evaluate why it's failing to do so.

[Infinitum]

41 minutes ago, Brutal Justice said:

There is no reason they should other than you want it.  They didn’t have it for how many years and did just fine?   

 

Possibly brutes and khelds because they somewhat fill tanker roles.  Not scrappers or stalkers.  They are plenty durable with 40% defense.   It’s the same exact logic as them having lower res caps.  

Going to have to hard disagree on this - theres plenty of stuff that illustrates the relative weaknesses of scrappers and stalkers to tankers and brutes when it comes to survivability.

 

Even overcapped they are weaker than tankers and brutes.

[Doomguide2005]

2 hours ago, Brutal Justice said:

Remove base buffs and pay to win buffs.  Then hard cap non tanker archetypes at 40% defense.  

 

Balanced.  

 

You can still min max with IOs and be crazy strong.  You just can’t tank everything with your blaster and make half the archetypes pointless.  Let’s be honest, all the other archetypes pointless.  

Vastly different, perhaps.  Balanced I strongly doubt it.  

 

Edit:  And to be clear 45% (or 59% or even 100%) is a soft cap.  The hard caps do vary by AT and are much much higher.

Edited January 23, 2021 by Doomguide2005

[Brutal Justice]

3 hours ago, Infinitum said:

Going to have to hard disagree on this - theres plenty of stuff that illustrates the relative weaknesses of scrappers and stalkers to tankers and brutes when it comes to survivability.

 

Even overcapped they are weaker than tankers and brutes.

I didn’t say they were as durable.  What I said was a soft capped blaster makes your “max survival tank with 3 attacks” largely pointless in 99% of the game.  

 

 

“A Scrapper stands gloriously among a swarm of charging enemies.  A Blaster stands gloriously over a pile of fresh bodies.” @Shred Monkey

 

Just substitute tank in there for scrapper if you wish.  Hard capping the non-tank types at 40% would give value to much more than just tanks

[Yomo Kimyata]

19 hours ago, CrudeVileTerror said:

Not meaning to escalate, but calling them "mythological" seems pretty disingenuous from my perspective, especially considering I'm fairly sure I've seen you reply to people expressing these personal experiences right here in the forums.  And I'll certainly cop to a bias too; I'm a roleplayer, and I primarily introduce roleplayers to this game.  It's an easy sell when they see what the game's designed to offer in the form of customization, personalization, and the promise of agency (at least with things like AE or group activities.  There's room for improvement in plenty of content).

Is it really so daunting to accept that there are people who are actively playing this game, but loathe things like the market or the invention system?  Even if you don't come across them in your own sphere, do you feel it's worthwhile harming their play experience?  Do you genuinely gain anything from making the game less accessible?

I'd like to see more effort dedicated to further improving accessibility, but I'm aware of the limited nature of the Dev Team and their resources.  In the absence of that, though, I certainly don't want to see those limited resources used on development that negatively impacts the players I enjoy spending my time with here.

No escalation or disingeniousity intended or interpreted!  

 

What I have seen, both in game and on these forums, is that people who solely use SOs either:

1.  Choose to use SOs for their own personal reasons, knowing that they could get more bang for the buck from IOs.  Nothing I can do about this.  Choice is choice.

2.  Can't afford the inf or the time to get IOs yet, but are working towards doing so.  Lots I can do about this.  Lots I *do* do about this.  Education, giving inf away, etc.

 

What I interpret from your comments are that you believe there is also a sizable portion of the community (5%? 50%? 90%) that use SOs because that is all that they have available, and they have no choice other than to solely use SOs.  I really haven't seen these people, and maybe I should have put "mythological" in parentheses.  I don't doubt that some exist, but I have to think it's a really really small percentage of the population on HC.  So small, that I don't advocate balancing *new* level 35+ content around them.

 

I do not advocate developing anything that takes away from anybody.  I would never advocate rebalancing all current content for IO use.  But developing future content that is balanced around what *I* perceive the vast majority of players use, yeah, I do support that.  There are no gates preventing anyone from using the IO system, only choice, and if you choose to take the slow path, that's cool with me, but please don't ask everyone to balance their play around your choice.  I'm saying "choice" a lot, and if anyone has no choice and is being forced to use a suboptimal system, let's focus on that and fix it.

 

I absolutely understand that others may feel differently, and I'm going to use an almost certainly broken analogy.  Let's say you choose not to fly for whatever reasons.  Getting to Hawaii without flying is possible (take a boat, swim!) but is a lot more work and expense.  If you can't fly because of a crippling condition, I am sorry, and I may be willing to chip in for your boat fare or your swimming training.  But regardless I'll be waiting on the beach in Waikiki to greet you with a fruity rum drink.

 

Again, just my opinion.  Nothing to get worked up about.