Change Sidekick to level rather than level-1

[BelleSorciere]

15 hours ago, SeraphimKensai said:

Personally the only ally level adjustments I think need to be made are making MM pets the same level as their MM (which would fix a lot of MM issues like pets getting left behind in group flight, or simply deleted by +4 mobs). That said, if I'm playing a lowbie and going to run higher than my own level content, I understand that I will likely be in over my head. This concept is shown to us in comics and the MCU as well, like Spiderman stowing away on a spaceship to help Ironman despite Ironman knowing it's above Spiderman's pay grade. Sure he helps as best as he can, but is largely just a distraction to someone like Thantos, whereas Captain Marvel can lay down a beating.

I think the Mastermind pet issue is a glaring issue that needs attention, and it's definitely impacted here more than most ATs.

13 hours ago, thunderforce said:

I'm not sure there _was_ a reason, beyond the "sidekick" name. The -1 level on sidekicks is the last vestige of the bad old pre-Super-Sidekicking days (and as you note it's especially bad when you're effectively -2 in addition to not having boffo incarnate powers, and worse yet when you're a mastermind with pets at -3 to the team leader); there really is no reason not to make everyone in the team the same combat level at all times.

 

Yeah the -2 thanks to the +1 is weird. I don't see an issue with being -1 to the incarnate shift so much, though.

 

9 hours ago, UltraAlt said:

So if we look to comicbook lore, the whole point of a sidekick is that they aren't at the same level as the hero.

They would be a partner or ally if they were on the same level.

 

Sidekicks *aren't* the same level even if they're fighting at the same combat level. "Lore" isn't a game mechanic, nor should it be one that causes quality of life issues. A lot of things in CoH were working as intended like exclusive toggles (Invulnerability, Stone Armor, Dark Armor), perma-unstoppable, and controller AOEs that could permanently lock down entire spawns. The ability to herd and AOE things down with no AOE limits were also based on mechanics working as intended. "WAI" is not a persuasive argument.

 

6 hours ago, SwitchFade said:

Word.

 

SK system, to me, works fine. This is classified as...

 

Operator Error... On the part of the team lead 

Nope. Also, not an argument. 

Edited February 10, 2021 by BelleSorciere

[UltraAlt]

3 hours ago, BelleSorciere said:

Sidekicks *aren't* the same level even if they're fighting at the same combat level. "Lore" isn't a game mechanic, nor should it be one that causes quality of life issues. A lot of things in CoH were working as intended like exclusive toggles (Invulnerability, Stone Armor, Dark Armor), perma-unstoppable, and controller AOEs that could permanently lock down entire spawns. The ability to herd and AOE things down with no AOE limits were also based on mechanics working as intended. "WAI" is not a persuasive argument.

 

Yes, lore is a game mechanic when it is what the mechanic is based on.

And I do understand that the sidekick doesn't have all the powers that they would have if they were actually leveled to that level.

 

There is no quality of life issue with the sidekicking mechanic. I didn't think there was a problem with it before the Homecoming improvements.

When it came out, it was a huge innovation to MMORPGs. It allowed  you to team with your friend even when you weren't high enough to run their missions (because it made you a high enough level to do so).

 

Even a DEV has used "working as intended" on me here. So yeah. That appears to be intended to be a persuasive argument.

 

If  you don't like being sidekicked, then run missions on your level and make your teammates exemplar down to you or get PL'd by a fire farm in the AE.

 

It's not a QoL issue or problem.

[SwitchFade]

8 hours ago, BelleSorciere said:

 

Nope. Also, not an argument. 

If, by this, you mean that in this particular argument, you perceive that my claim lacks data or merit in your OPINION, I respect that.

 

I, too, do not see credible evidence in your claim.

 

Regardless, your perspective is immaterial to the fact that the SK system does work well. The problem statement in the OP was one of fighting beyond +4. This is directly caused by.... Drum roll.... The team lead setting his personal difficulty at +4, thereby making all SKs -5.

 

Now, if we ASSUME that the SK system is not functioning properly, we must gather EVIDENCE.

 

Fine. Evidence:

 

What if the team lead lowered the difficulty to +3... Would there be an issue of -5? No, issue resolved. Because the system works well when used properly, this is not a systemic issue, but operator Error. Chainsaws work well when used on wood, safely. When used on feet and kneecaps.... Not the chainsaw at fault there...

 

Is the SIDEKICK system intended to be a PEER system? No, it is intended to bring along a lower level player as a sidekick. System working as intended. No specific issue with the system, so a change cannot be attributed to systemic failure; change would be attributed to design preference. Or a more colorful narrative, "Hey there Robin, would you mind being my sidekick and... leading the way? Here's all my stuff, you're now my equal." 🤪 Not so much...

 

I'm sure we can inspect much more evidence and it would all lead to the same result, the -sidekick- system is exactly what it should be.

 

Working not only as intended, but as it rightly should... Sidekicks get b-slapped when they get overly confident (that's why they're the bottom b@tch 😂) and a bad team lead can get his whole team wiped.

 

Edited February 10, 2021 by SwitchFade

[SwitchFade]

8 hours ago, BelleSorciere said:

 "WAI" is not a persuasive argument.

 

Please keep in mind, the onus of a persuasive argument is on the person making the case for change...

 

Hence, working as intended is absolutely legitimate, because those of us who are fine with it have absolutely no burden to even justify it or argue anything.

 

The burden lies on the person who is advocating change. Convince me, or...

 

No vote, working just fine 😋

[arthurh35353]

I will state that I've been on the 'burnt' end of this and that the team leader didn't realize there was an issue going on until the sidekicks complained that we were hitting about 10% of the time.

 

You do kind of need to aim for the lowest common denominator or break point, so since the +1 level really hurts at the bleeding purple edge, removing it so that doesn't overly hit the sidekick is very much a reasonable step, IMO.

[thunderforce]

7 hours ago, UltraAlt said:

There is no quality of life issue with the sidekicking mechanic. I didn't think there was a problem with it before the Homecoming improvements.

When it came out, it was a huge innovation to MMORPGs. It allowed  you to team with your friend even when you weren't high enough to run their missions (because it made you a high enough level to do so).

It was much better than not being able to team with them at all, but the pairing up was obnoxious. Then Giant Monsters were made level agnostic, and that was better still, and some of us asked why everything couldn't be like that. Then Super Sidekicking came out and that was better again, and it was better because it made everyone in an instance nearly the same combat level. Every past step in this direction has been good; we should take the final one.

7 hours ago, UltraAlt said:

Even a DEV has used "working as intended" on me here. So yeah. That appears to be intended to be a persuasive argument.

Obviously it works as intended, it's not a bug. Is anyone saying it doesn't? The point is that the design could be improved.

7 hours ago, UltraAlt said:

It's not a QoL issue or problem.

It evidently is; the OP and others on this thread have explained very clearly how it impacts their QoL and proposed a simple solution, and the issue with MM tier 1 pets is widely discussed and - while it wouldn't go away - would be considerably reduced.

11 hours ago, BelleSorciere said:

Yeah the -2 thanks to the +1 is weird. I don't see an issue with being -1 to the incarnate shift so much, though.

Personally, I'd just burn the entire incarnate shift mechanic with fire, but that's another thread; failing that, it seems to me like exactly another manifestation of the same problem. It's less bad (because "+4" difficulty is really +3 for those 50+1s) but it makes you miss, it makes your tier 1 pets miss, it makes you less effective when you're already less effective by having fewer powers... just as I say to someone else in the first paragraph here, follow it up to its logical conclusion and make everyone on the team the same combat level. The incarnates get their amazingly good incarnate powers, so it's not like they'll be no different to their teammates.

[BelleSorciere]

9 hours ago, UltraAlt said:

 

Yes, lore is a game mechanic when it is what the mechanic is based on.

And I do understand that the sidekick doesn't have all the powers that they would have if they were actually leveled to that level.

 

There is no quality of life issue with the sidekicking mechanic. I didn't think there was a problem with it before the Homecoming improvements.

When it came out, it was a huge innovation to MMORPGs. It allowed  you to team with your friend even when you weren't high enough to run their missions (because it made you a high enough level to do so).

 

Even a DEV has used "working as intended" on me here. So yeah. That appears to be intended to be a persuasive argument.

 

If  you don't like being sidekicked, then run missions on your level and make your teammates exemplar down to you or get PL'd by a fire farm in the AE.

 

It's not a QoL issue or problem.

There clearly is a quality of life issue that I described and others have concurred on. That you do not see it as such does not magically vanish it away.

 

My point was that things are working as intended until it's not intended anymore. 

 

Your solutions aren't solutions to the issue I brought up.

 

"Lore" isn't a meaningful justification since there is no standard which all sidekicks meet. It's not a mechanical distinction, but a story one. A game does not need to be beholden to genre conventions in books, movies, comics, or TV shows. In general, gameplay needs to be enjoyable and not punishing. If the outcome is to discourage to discourage people from teaming with higher level characters then there's a problem.

 

I have my own fire farmer and PL whenever I feel like it, but I shouldn't have to power level every character to 50 in order to enjoy the game, and if that's what you believe people should be doing, I sincerely question your understanding of the game.

 

More generally, I did in fact outline what the problem was, my proposed solution, and why I think my solution works. "This isn't a problem" isn't a persuasive argument in response to that. It's not even an argument, it's just threadcrapping. Also, making SKs the same combat level as the team leader or mission holder doesn't make them "peers." They still have a lower security level, fewer powers, and fewer slots. Making them the same combat level doesn't make them "peers" or "equals" it just means they hit more often for more damage, longer control, or better debuffs.

Edited February 10, 2021 by BelleSorciere

[BelleSorciere]

5 hours ago, SwitchFade said:

Please keep in mind, the onus of a persuasive argument is on the person making the case for change...

 

Hence, working as intended is absolutely legitimate, because those of us who are fine with it have absolutely no burden to even justify it or argue anything.

 

The burden lies on the person who is advocating change. Convince me, or...

 

No vote, working just fine 😋

"Working as intended" is not an argument in this case. I explained why the intended working isn't great for as it turns out, many more people than myself. If I say "this game mechanic as intended isn't doing its job," responding with "working as intended" completely fails to engage the argument as much as telling people to ask the team leader to turn the difficulty down. It's not engagement, it's just clutter and adds nothing.

 

Since the content of your responses seem to boil down to "nuh uh" I won't respond further. Have a nice day!

Edited February 10, 2021 by BelleSorciere

[SwitchFade]

1 hour ago, BelleSorciere said:

"Working as intended" is not an argument in this case. I explained why the intended working isn't great for as it turns out, many more people than myself. If I say "this game mechanic as intended isn't doing its job," responding with "working as intended" completely fails to engage the argument as much as telling people to ask the team leader to turn the difficulty down. It's not engagement, it's just clutter and adds nothing.

 

Since the content of your responses seem to boil down to "nuh uh" I won't respond further. Have a nice day!

Again, your claim and supporting data are unconvincing.

 

System is good as is, I don't need to make a case why, bec8ause I'm not the one arguing for change.

 

I went out of my way to provide evidence disproving the THEORY that SKing is systemically not working. It is conclusively working well.

 

Using argumentative fallacies such as straw men, unsubstantiated data, personal attacks and hyperbole are not evidentiary, terribly sorry.

 

I understand and accept your opinions; however, I find your argument uncompelling, unsupported by any valid data and your choice of argumentative tactics highly suspect, therefore I cannot agree with your opinions. I'm glad you have them, as the world needs all kinds.

 

Hard no vote on your proposed change 😄

Edited February 10, 2021 by SwitchFade

[SwitchFade]

1 hour ago, BelleSorciere said:

There clearly is a quality of life issue that I described and others have concurred on. That you do not see it as such does not magically vanish it away.

 

My point was that things are working as intended until it's not intended anymore. 

 

Your solutions aren't solutions to the issue I brought up.

 

"Lore" isn't a meaningful justification since there is no standard which all sidekicks meet. It's not a mechanical distinction, but a story one. A game does not need to be beholden to genre conventions in books, movies, comics, or TV shows. In general, gameplay needs to be enjoyable and not punishing. If the outcome is to discourage to discourage people from teaming with higher level characters then there's a problem.

 

I have my own fire farmer and PL whenever I feel like it, but I shouldn't have to power level every character to 50 in order to enjoy the game, and if that's what you believe people should be doing, I sincerely question your understanding of the game.

 

More generally, I did in fact outline what the problem was, my proposed solution, and why I think my solution works. "This isn't a problem" isn't a persuasive argument in response to that. It's not even an argument, it's just threadcrapping. Also, making SKs the same combat level as the team leader or mission holder doesn't make them "peers." They still have a lower security level, fewer powers, and fewer slots. Making them the same combat level doesn't make them "peers" or "equals" it just means they hit more often for more damage, longer control, or better debuffs

It's your job to convince people to change, not our job to convince ourselves. Your audience likes the system, so don't berate them for liking it.

 

"This isn't a problem" is 100% valid, we're good to go, YOU'RE the one who wants a change, work harder to convince us, because right now, your case is unconvincing.

[DoctorDitko]

OK, weighing in with a highly subjective opinion.

One of my favorite comics I own is "For the Man Who has Everything," by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons.

(Adapted as a JL episode while losing much nuance, but the DCAU version has its own charms. Talking about the comic here.)

In it, Batman, Robin, and Wonder Woman visit the Fortress of Solitude on Superman's birthday.

Turns out Superman has been Trojan Horsed by Mongul, who sent him a flower.

 

But that's not the point. The point is, Wonder Woman takes on Mongul one-on-one while Batman tries to free Superman from the fantasy projected by the Black Lotus. Cool fight, WW uses the weapons in Supe's collection to good effect, Batman takes Superman's place in the illusion reality projected by the Black Lotus...

And Robin manages to be the one who defeats Mongul, by essentially clicking a glowy.

 

(Turns out the weird gloves Mongul is wearing when they meet him are for safely handling the Black Lotus. Robin figures this out, pulls it off Bruce, and throws it on Mongul.)

 

The point is he wasn't fighting Mongul. He wasn't supposed to. Just as sidekicked heroes aren't supposed to be doing the beatdowns in CoH.

Buff. Click glowies. Debuffs won't work so well, but are worth a shot. Just don't feel slighted if you aren't dishing out the hurt on the bad guys.

 

[BelleSorciere]

46 minutes ago, DoctorDitko said:

The point is he wasn't fighting Mongul. He wasn't supposed to. Just as sidekicked heroes aren't supposed to be doing the beatdowns in CoH.

Buff. Click glowies. Debuffs won't work so well, but are worth a shot. Just don't feel slighted if you aren't dishing out the hurt on the bad guys.

 

 

Does anyone play like this? I don't recall ever seeing anyone advocate this sort of thing

 

Plus 99% of the time the only thing to do is participate in beat downs.

[thunderforce]

15 hours ago, DoctorDitko said:

Cool fight, WW uses the weapons in Supe's collection to good effect, Batman takes Superman's place in the illusion reality projected by the Black Lotus...

And Robin manages to be the one who defeats Mongul, by essentially clicking a glowy.

"Sidekick clicks a glowie" might make for an interesting comic storyline, but not every interesting comic storyline makes for good gameplay. When I die, I want to be rezzed or go to the hospital, not wait 3 months for the shocking revelation that I wasn't actually dead, or got better, or that someone else is playing my character now...

[DoctorDitko]

Fair enough.

 

Comics don't always translate directly to Real Life (dammit!) and sometimes not even to games.

(Heck, by some standards -- Marvel in the 70s, I'm looking at you -- every teamup would be preceded by a PVP hero fight. Then you can team up!)

I personally don't mind the -1 offset, but I wouldn't object to it being a Notoriety knob you could twiddle. Or possibly as part of the general "challenge settings" for all missions proposed elsewhere.

 

Here's hoping it would be an easy and popular change.

[arthurh35353]

I would suspect that adding the option to the accept team dialogue would be more work that just changing the default -1 level offset.

[arthurh35353]

I actually ran into this again on a brand new character, just teaming up with a lowbie. They were level 6 +0/x1. The mission seemed to be full more of more than half +1s to them. Our first level 8 boss (purple!) wrecked us entirely and I was pretty useless because they were +2. Not an edge case, not people pushing unnecessarily hard.

 

Just being penalized an extra level at low levels. I can definitely agree that the -1 to mentor level is an overly harsh leash on 'power' for 'powers' sake.

[Uun]

14 hours ago, arthurh35353 said:

I actually ran into this again on a brand new character, just teaming up with a lowbie. They were level 6 +0/x1. The mission seemed to be full more of more than half +1s to them. Our first level 8 boss (purple!) wrecked us entirely and I was pretty useless because they were +2. Not an edge case, not people pushing unnecessarily hard.

 

Just being penalized an extra level at low levels. I can definitely agree that the -1 to mentor level is an overly harsh leash on 'power' for 'powers' sake.

If the mission holder is lvl 6 and got a lvl 8 boss while set to +0, that's a bug. On the other hand, getting +1s while set to +0 is working as intended. 

[arthurh35353]

2 hours ago, Uun said:

If the mission holder is lvl 6 and got a lvl 8 boss while set to +0, that's a bug. On the other hand, getting +1s while set to +0 is working as intended. 

They were +2 to me as the sidekick, so they were only +1 to the mentor, so 'yes' working as intended, though I'm not sure that the devs meant them to be that hard.

[TemporalVileTerror]

Harkening back to how Sidekicking used to work, what if the higher-level members of a team had a PBAoE Auto Aura which enhanced the lower-level team members' To-Hit/Accuracy and Damage.

It's thematic, encourages players to stick together, retains the -1 level effect, but provides a means for Sidekicks/Lackeys to contribute a little more.

Maybe just add it to Incarnates, so any non-Incarnates on the team get the buff.

And/or maybe have the buff work more intensely if the Mentor is defeated, causing a sort of Vengeance buff.

 

Just some ideas to spitball around.  Thinking in different directions and all that.

[SwitchFade]

23 hours ago, arthurh35353 said:

I actually ran into this again on a brand new character, just teaming up with a lowbie. They were level 6 +0/x1. The mission seemed to be full more of more than half +1s to them. Our first level 8 boss (purple!) wrecked us entirely and I was pretty useless because they were +2. Not an edge case, not people pushing unnecessarily hard.

 

Just being penalized an extra level at low levels. I can definitely agree that the -1 to mentor level is an overly harsh leash on 'power' for 'powers' sake.

Hi. Sorry, this data is inconclusive; what arc, what zone what mission? Some of the zones have content that is harder, some legacy content is easier.

 

0/0 is the same as 0/1, the /1 means spawn size, as I am sure you know (mentioning it for other readers).

 

All missions spawn MOBs 0-1 level higher than your diff setting, for example at the mentioned lvl 6, and at 0/ missions would spawn 6-7 with a rare 8. If you were in kings row, that content is harder. Hollows would be fairly even and atlas park would be the old easy legacy content.

 

It's always been the norm that at 0 level shift, MOBs will spawn even to +1 con, with occasional +2.

[SwitchFade]

8 hours ago, Uun said:

If the mission holder is lvl 6 and got a lvl 8 boss while set to +0, that's a bug. On the other hand, getting +1s while set to +0 is working as intended. 

+2s happen occasionally, also depends on content.

[UltraAlt]

On 2/10/2021 at 2:35 PM, BelleSorciere said:

There clearly is a quality of life issue that I described and others have concurred on. That you do not see it as such does not magically vanish it away.

My same point on many of the things that I'm told are "working as intended".

 

I haven't read the entire thread.

I am going on my personal experience.

Based on my experience, there isn't anything wrong with the sidekicking system.

 

To me, the game is like a puzzle. How do I make what I can do fit in and help the team that I'm on?

 

But I definitely see different play styles. One of which is 'What IS the team doing for me? Because I'm the important one."

 

Sidekicks are there to aide the more powerful characters and not to be as powerful as they are.

As I have said, they wouldn't be sidekicks if they were on equal footing.

 

If it is really a problem, it isn't that hard to get power-leveled.

 

I say enjoy the struggle and the actual game. You don't have to team up with level 50's when you are level 5 (or level 40 for that matter). That is your choice.

 

If I'm on a higher level team and I don't feel like I can help, I'll bail out. I'm not joining a higher level team to be carried. Most of the time I feel like my characters pull their own weight base relative to my character's abilities.

No door sitter, I.

 

Everyone can play the game their own way and have fun.

 

The sidekick system is fine from my viewpoint. Because you disagree doesn't mean that my viewpoint is wrong. It is simply different from yours.

[Doomguide2005]

On 2/14/2021 at 6:56 PM, TemporalVileTerror said:

Harkening back to how Sidekicking used to work, what if the higher-level members of a team had a PBAoE Auto Aura which enhanced the lower-level team members' To-Hit/Accuracy and Damage.

It's thematic, encourages players to stick together, retains the -1 level effect, but provides a means for Sidekicks/Lackeys to contribute a little more.

Maybe just add it to Incarnates, so any non-Incarnates on the team get the buff.

And/or maybe have the buff work more intensely if the Mentor is defeated, causing a sort of Vengeance buff.

 

Just some ideas to spitball around.  Thinking in different directions and all that.

Made me chuckle ... sounds like Supremacy for Sidekicks (which I'm guessing is where the idea came from).  Which isn't such a bad idea though I think there would be a need to balance it against actually taking the Leadership pool (Tactics, Assault etc.).   It shouldn't be more potent for the pairing than Leadership taken by the Mentor,  particularly if the two were to stack their effects.  

[Col. Kernel]

On 2/7/2021 at 7:30 AM, TemporalVileTerror said:

Not hoping to get lynched here, but . . . 

Could the team leaders just start being considerate and launching things at +3 (or lower) instead when they know they have Sidekicks on the team?

Counter point:  If you're not 50 you're there for the XP more than to assist the team.

[Doc_Scorpion]

12 minutes ago, Col. Kernel said:

Counter point:  If you're not 50 you're there for the XP more than to assist the team.

An assumption, not a fact.