Community-Agreed Parameters

[Galaxy Brain]

A lot of controversy comes from perspective and the multitude of different ways we can play CoH. You can adjust basically any part of the game to your liking, and tackle any kind of content you want, even make your own content! With all these options, it is sometimes hard to decide what lens to view something through.

 

Do we look at things purely on their own merits, with 0 outside influence? Do we look at how it performs with no holds barred, all the outside abilities stacked on? Somewhere in between? In a test environment or throw them into the meat grinder of soloing a very hard task? Just one way is clearly not enough! I would like to take an opportunity for us to come together and devise a handful of "Community Parameters" that we can judge things on. It won't be just one point of view, but each lens I feel should be weighed equally and represent different aspects of the game.

 

Just to start things off, some of the categories tossed around I see are:

 

• "100% Pure", no bells and whistles outside (SO enhancements) and using only X thing as isolated as possible
• "Mid Tier" investment where you use a lot of common tools (LotG, etc) but nothing extreme (no purples, temp powers, incarnates)
• "High Tier" investment where basically anything you can use on a build goes (purples, incarnates, etc), but still no "outside" factors like temp powers, boosts, or inspirations
• "Freeform" where there's no rules outside multi-boxing / other oddities 

 

There are probably many more permutations when it then comes to what content you face, difficulty levels, and so on and so forth but I'm confident we could come up with a list of parameters that could accommodate many different viewpoints without going too crazy.

 

Thoughts?

[wjrasmussen]

Noting looking for an agreement of this kind of thing.  Play my own way.

[Troo]

Level ranges could be appropriate.

30, 40, 50, Incarnate might be overkill, but some acknowledgement of ranges that folks spend time at beyond W3 r0LL3s 5Os 4LLt1m3. Maybe a frequent/common taskforce level?

[oedipus_tex]

Rather than do a full write up, I'll share a piece of music that sets the tone when I think about the pace I want to play at. This track comes from Streets of Rage Remake, which was a fan made sequel to Streets of Rage beat em upon the Sega Genesis.

 

 

 

Basically, what I am looking for is a game that is not too difficulty and not too easy, where the enemies are varied, and while there is variation in player skill level, everyone can more or less contribute to the battle. Most importantly, there's a sense that you are fighting the enemies in a kind of dance. There are enemy groups you dispatch with ease, others that give you more trouble. You also just can't mash the Call In Reinforcements button (ie nukes) constantly, there's a payload economy to mini-manage.

It's no fault of the current developer team, but I used to get a much stronger sense of this before the incarnate system came around. Characters had a variety of moves. Some were much stronger than others, some frankly needed buffs. But there was a sense that each character was very different. The game was a mostly pleasant cooperative beat em up.

 

I don't want to get into a fight with anyone about the Incarnate system, but other than the Alpha slot I find it same-y and less exciting. It's not just about power inflation, for me it's about the fact that I spent all this energy picking out a build and crafting it just for every character to end up with same-y temp powers. Judgment recharges in 90 seconds so on a team of 8 it fires every 12 seconds. It just holds no more attraction for me. I've become a soloist and since I can solo more to my taste on a private server where I make the rules, I spend a lot more time there than in public servers. None of this is the Homecoming team's fault, it's what the were left with. I wish the OG dev team had been less inclined to burn down old content to build their newest adventures. 

[Machariel]

I play pretty much everything with a 'high-tier' level of investment - any character that I care about at all I bring up to 50+1 and a full build before I really start to pass judgement on it it and when I think about game balance it's with that in mind. 

 

I share @oedipus_tex's view that the Judgement power in particular is responsible for flattening a lot of the difficulty curve in the game.  A lot of the things you can do in the game kind of don't matter when enemies die that fast.

[golstat2003]

5 hours ago, Machariel said:

I play pretty much everything with a 'high-tier' level of investment - any character that I care about at all I bring up to 50+1 and a full build before I really start to pass judgement on it it and when I think about game balance it's with that in mind. 

 

I share @oedipus_tex's view that the Judgement power in particular is responsible for flattening a lot of the difficulty curve in the game.  A lot of the things you can do in the game kind of don't matter when enemies die that fast.

Crashless nukes were doing that long before Judgement came into existence.

[Machariel]

16 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

Crashless nukes were doing that long before Judgement came into existence.

Yes, I know.  Not all ATs get them whereas every single character gets a crashless nuke better than any Blaster T9 on a 90sec cooldown.  Not to be rude but what was your point?

Edit: I was incorrect, per galaxy brain, mb

Edited March 8, 2021 by Machariel

[golstat2003]

3 minutes ago, Machariel said:

Yes, I know.  Not all ATs get them whereas every single character gets a crashless nuke better than any Blaster T9 on a 90sec cooldown.  Not to be rude but what was your point?

The point is the game was already unbalanced by things like crashless T9s long before judgement came around. Plus perma-hasten, etc etc.

 

Incarnates are the least of the games issues, if you're talking about teams being able to steam roll content. Steam rolling content was where COH was looooong before incarnates.

 

Hell we just had an entire 50+ page thread about IOs.

Edited March 8, 2021 by golstat2003

[Machariel]

Ok.  This thread isn't about what's unbalancing the game (if anything) but about what you consider your personal standard for rating sets.  So I don't disagree with you but I'm not interested and I think it's off topic.

Edited March 8, 2021 by Machariel

[golstat2003]

4 minutes ago, Machariel said:

Ok.  If you don't see the difference between a crashless nuke that's AT restricted and one that isn't I don't really know what to tell you.  This thread isn't about what's unbalancing the game (if anything) but about what you consider your personal standard for rating sets.  So I don't disagree with you but I'm not interested and I think it's off topic.

Judgement IS restricted. Incarnates cannot be used below 45. All the other things that come from set IOs in many instances aren't, especially when we are referring to balance. 

 

Just responding to what was posted in the thread.

 

------------

From Oedipus_rex:

 

I don't want to get into a fight with anyone about the Incarnate system, but other than the Alpha slot I find it same-y and less exciting. It's not just about power inflation, for me it's about the fact that I spent all this energy picking out a build and crafting it just for every character to end up with same-y temp powers. Judgment recharges in 90 seconds so on a team of 8 it fires every 12 seconds. It just holds no more attraction for me. I've become a soloist and since I can solo more to my taste on a private server where I make the rules, I spend a lot more time there than in public servers. None of this is the Homecoming team's fault, it's what the were left with. I wish the OG dev team had been less inclined to burn down old content to build their newest adventures. 

Edited March 8, 2021 by golstat2003

[TemporalVileTerror]

Sort of like the original premise for the IO Balance Thread being your attempt to read the situation based on a slice of market trends, @Galaxy Brain, I think you're looking for the crucial answers to the important questions . . . but I'm not sure the framework you're asking this particular question with is necessarily going to get us there.

When "getting to 50" / "reaching endgame" isn't even the agreed upon primary motivator for players, we're already at a huge disadvantage when trying to analyze City of Heroes by metrics which other games in the MMO genre are.
A foundational series of questions we ask all players (and Devs) may want to start with:  What do you consider "playing City of Heroes" to mean?

 

This thread is still a good prompt for a discussion of course.  I'm not meaning to subvert that.  Just trying to illuminate that we may need to pull back a little further to really get to the answers I think you're looking for.

[Myrmidon]

There are no pacts between lions and men.

[Infinitum]

9 hours ago, oedipus_tex said:

I wish the OG dev team had been less inclined to burn down old content to build their newest adventures. 

But then there wouldn't have been anything new - and in a pay game especially - why pay for stagnation?

 

I imagine they envisioned being around longer to build on the incarnate system - but even now I don't see it as a problem as much as stagnation - the been there done that routine.

 

So I imagine new characters to relive it but as the new characters story.

 

Incarnates don't work below 45 - I would guess 75% of the game is below 45 - so I don't see it as an issue - judgements sure arent wiping content for my teams at the difficulty levels I normally run at.

 

As far as parameters are concerned - high level testing IMO should be no inspirations or outside buffs or anything that isn't constant or static. 

 

What should be included IMO - any thing that can fit the framework of your build - IOs, passive accolade powers that perma boost a stat, any perma incarnate stat - Alpha, degenerative, hybrids passive boost.

 

This is for high level testing - how far you can survive - or how fast you can kill type of testing.

[Turric]

13 hours ago, Machariel said:

I play pretty much everything with a 'high-tier' level of investment - any character that I care about at all I bring up to 50+1 and a full build before I really start to pass judgement on it it and when I think about game balance it's with that in mind. 

 

I am like Macheriel (that was a good ship in Eve Online btw) and play at a "high level". Having played this game since 2005, I've played all content at one point. Now, I power level a character to 50, then outfit their build before ever playing it. And I do not judge until I have a few Vet levels under the belt. For me, the sweet spot in the game is experimenting different power combinations. 

 

And to add my 2 cents to the other argument: group play is where I wish to do steamroll content, so crashless nukes and Judgments are quite fine with me. Almost all of my 40 toons can solo +4x8 content (most, not all) but some of them do so much slower than a group tears through content, and that is why I might join a group. But if I want to enjoy content, I play it solo. I really wish there was a way for all task / strike forces to be done solo for that reason, but with much decreased Merit Rewards or whatever.

[nihilii]

8 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

Crashless nukes were doing that long before Judgement came into existence.

Doesn't Judgement predate crashless nukes?

[America's Angel]

It's a videogame. Use everything. That's how you discover what is over-performing. It's impossible to balance a game if you're not looking at it as a whole.

 

Current overperformers:

-Inspirations

-Judgement

-Lore

-The 10s/30s/60s buff from Destiny

 

I'd rather see those four things looked at before procs / any powersets are significantly rebalanced.

 

Build a healthy foundation and all that.

[Yomo Kimyata]

7 hours ago, Myrmidon said:

There are no pacts between lions and men.

Well, in THAT case I'm putting the thorn back.

[Parabola]

1 hour ago, nihilii said:

Doesn't Judgement predate crashless nukes?

Archery, dual pistols, beam rifle and assault rifle always had crashless nukes didn't they? Can't remember which of those preceded incarnate powers though.

[Snarky]

15 hours ago, Machariel said:

I play pretty much everything with a 'high-tier' level of investment - any character that I care about at all I bring up to 50+1 and a full build before I really start to pass judgement on it it and when I think about game balance it's with that in mind. 

 

I share @oedipus_tex's view that the Judgement power in particular is responsible for flattening a lot of the difficulty curve in the game.  A lot of the things you can do in the game kind of don't matter when enemies die that fast.

Ran a Saga of the long commutes of Faathim last night.  I hustled a lot (just regular sorcery fly unfortunately) and a lot of creative zone TPs.  We got out in an hour and a half.  But the reason I bring it up.  In the missions where we had mobs my Nuke (Dark/Dark/Soul Brute...so Void, of course) was useful.  But even against +0 was not spectacular.  there were a LOT of tough Bosses in those mobs.  They took the Nuke on the chin and were like, okay, when you going to get serious?  I was the only Brute or Tank in the team, and Dark does not handle agro right.  I used the Nuke as a taunt....

[nihilii]

27 minutes ago, parabola said:

Archery, dual pistols, beam rifle and assault rifle always had crashless nukes didn't they? Can't remember which of those preceded incarnate powers though.

That's fair. Archery, DP and AR were all way before incarnates.

[Replacement]

A generalized list of topics where posters argue due to a fundamental mismatch of game expectation.  Bulleted points are not my opinion; they are my attempt to summarize a broad forum perspective.  I tended towards a bit more draconian than most human brains work -- chances are, you will see yourself as having an opinion that falls between one of the "tentpoles" listed here.

 

Balance scales

In discussions of balance, particularly powerset balance.

• Assessments should assume the strongest build involving the element in question.
• Assessments should assume SOs only.
• A vacuum is best; you should ignore even the Secondaries a set can be paired with.
• All player options should "scale" similarly, being roughly the same power with the same amount of investment.
• Outside influences are a reality, and should also be considered (inspirations, teammates).

Community involvement

How involved should the community be in the addition of new game material?

• Nothing should be added without a long tail of player conversation to reference.
• Our feedback and even our suggestions' worth is in how it informs developers of pain points and gaps in the player experience.
• The developers and game runners have all the power and we should be happy there's even a beta process.
• Sometimes you gotta break an egg and some changes are worth making, even without some players on board.

The OG Developer's legacy

How much of a living museum should this be?

• The game is pristine; anything added should seek to make as few waves as possible.
• We have a lot we've learned about game design; let's use that to fix old wrongs.
• It's 202x, baby! *pew pew finger guns!* Rule of cool is the design philosophy now.

//

 

I'm sure this isn't every broad category, and others would have organized these differently.  Within the categories, I've no doubt missed some very cornerstone opinions. 

 

Some of these topic responses can really never be anything but "ideals" for people to associate themselves with, and maybe that could be enough for identifying varying opinions instead of leaping straight to "wow that's a bad idea/take" and starting a 3 page fight.

[TemporalVileTerror]

Nicely said, @Replacement.

Some additional gradients also exist in the context of the themes, tone, and depth of the narrative content, as well as where to draw the lines between the gameplay being in service to those elements, or those elements being in service to the gameplay.  Adjusting the numbers of Powers for "balance" can't be wholly divorced from the entirety of the game experience, especially when the game experience has such a wide range of valid interpretations.

The phrase "feeling powerful" comes up a lot (or derivatives such as "feelings like a hero/villain" or "feelings like I matter"), but there are some clearly different interpretations of what that even means.

[Galaxy Brain]

2 hours ago, nihilii said:

Doesn't Judgement predate crashless nukes?

Judgements were added in i20 iirc, and the nuke changes were all slated in the i24 patch notes, so Judgements as a concept predate that by quite a bit. Also, looking at the issues I am shocked to see Bruising on Tanks was only introduced in i18???

 

Anyways, incarnates are part of the game and would definitely be a category to look at.

 

7 hours ago, TemporalVileTerror said:

Sort of like the original premise for the IO Balance Thread being your attempt to read the situation based on a slice of market trends, @Galaxy Brain, I think you're looking for the crucial answers to the important questions . . . but I'm not sure the framework you're asking this particular question with is necessarily going to get us there.

When "getting to 50" / "reaching endgame" isn't even the agreed upon primary motivator for players, we're already at a huge disadvantage when trying to analyze City of Heroes by metrics which other games in the MMO genre are.
A foundational series of questions we ask all players (and Devs) may want to start with:  What do you consider "playing City of Heroes" to mean?

 

This thread is still a good prompt for a discussion of course.  I'm not meaning to subvert that.  Just trying to illuminate that we may need to pull back a little further to really get to the answers I think you're looking for.

The highlight here I think is too ambiguous as it could mean anything from high lvl power gaming to making fun costumes and hanging in Pocket D, or anything in between. That said, I do feel the following definition to be the most true for the most people:

 

Playing CoH = Designing a highly customized character in order to use super powers and defeat hoards of enemies in specially instanced missions. 

 

Even at 0/1 difficulty, your average mission has dozens of enemies to where I'd call it a hoard! The main gameplay loop of CoH for the vast majority of it is going into instanced missions and kicking ass. How you go about that changes, but that is the core of it. You kick ass, get experience and get more opportunities for growth in your own way, and gain inf to further improve yourself. Yes, there are outside missions / events / etc, but tbh 90% of all missions are instanced beat-em-ups. There is stuff in between with travel, stories, side games, etc, but the core gameplay loop is Go Hunt Kill Skulls.

 

With that in mind, I would imagine test parameters around balance would have to do with a mission format. "How fast / safe can X help complete a mission?" would be the ultimate question asked per test IMO as that is what it all sort of boils down to in the end for everyone. In my point of view, the two variables to this question are X and Mission.

 

X we kind of went over, but that is the wildcard. Powerset? Power? Inspirations? IO's? Incarnates? The list goes on, and we definitely need to come up with something there otherwise it'd be endless.

 

On the Mission side, we at least have more refined control in terms of the content. The map I feel is more of a player issue than a power issue most of the time, and with them being random per most missions can probably be excluded as a wild card unless we have a set task. So that leaves Difficulty and Enemy groups as the main factors.

 

Starting with difficulty, we have the ability to tweak the enemy's level from -1 to +4, the team size from 1-8, enable or disable bosses, as well as enable or disable AV's. off the bat, I feel that AV's should be disabled as honestly beating them down solo is more of a gimmick than an expected task. Likewise, I feel Bosses should be enabled as normal content seems to be built around boss-tier enemies being standard. The next step is a doozy with a possible 40 combinations... but I feel we can narrow it down to 6:

1. +0/x1 = The absolute standard, bare minimum default difficulty. This will determine the baseline of baselines in all scenarios as this is what the game itself sets you to.
2. +0/x3 = After some research, I found that in a mission with 10 encounters, a x1 difficulty averages out to about 25 enemies per mission. At x3, this averaged out to 61 enemies which is a little over double the amount which seems fitting for a next step up. Avg group size goes from 3 to 6 as well as more frequent boss encounters.
3. +0/x8 = The max team size, this puts AoE to the test with an avg of 131 enemies per mission in the 10-encounter tests, a little over double x3. Likewise, avg spawn size increased from 6 to 12~13. In my research, other difficulties between 3 and 8 did not provide avg spawn sizes greater than 10 which is where AoE coverage comes into play with a decent chunk of AT's capping at 10 targets. x8 will be able to showcase why target caps matter more than just raw AoE potential.
4. +3/x1 = Instead of jumping to +4, +3 offers a mix of +3 and +4 that is a little more palatable. In the 10 encounters, 40% of the mission had a higher lvl enemy every time so in this case it would be 60% +3 and 40% +4 (same at +0 but still).
5. +3/x3 = Like both above, this will test a group of harder enemies per fight. Odds are if you can breeze through this, the higher difficulties would be doable.
6. +3/x8 = Essentially the max difficulty with a decent portion being +4, also mirrors end game a bit due to the +1 level shift capping you at technically +3. 

 

This gives us 6 distinct challenge ratings that would likely cover a large swath of content options, without having to do 40 per test. Thinking about it more, we could probably even axe 3/1 if need be, and if we really want we could average it all out and have +2/x4 be a default test as a sort of "medium difficulty" option. x4 had 89 enemies on avg, 3.6x more than x1 and about 67% of x8, combine that with +2/+3 enemies and you can have a decent benchmark. 

 

I think this category has to weigh time as a factor to get the most data in the most effecient way possible. What do you all think?

[oedipus_tex]

14 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

Crashless nukes were doing that long before Judgement came into existence.

 

 

Crashless nukes existed on 3 powersets. One of which was Assault Rifle.

 

Regardless, damage stacks. Judgment deals damage on top of nukes.

 

Judgment isn't a power adjacent to another choice in another tree or powerset. It's not even really a choice. Every character gets this as a standard attack from normal advancement. The power hits up to 40 enemies and given its 90 second recharge will fire every 11.25 seconds on an 8 player team.

 

Judgement defines team combat on late game teams. You can argue you like it that way, but the numbers don't tell lies.

Edited March 8, 2021 by oedipus_tex

[TemporalVileTerror]

Not to subvert further, but I think it's worth tackling the assumption of "most true for the most people" at some point.  In another thread, probably.

 

But operating within that parameter, I think that "X factor" is probably equally impactful, if not more than, the +X/xY Notoriety.  

The difficulty settings are fairly solid numbers, much easier to graph than the incredibly fluid nature of all the other variables.  Of course, that does mean we might be able to meaningfully predict the impact of Notoriety in test cases.  Factoring those in to some spreadsheets where we can drop the more variable aspects of the game for analyse could be fruitful.

Your proposed categories are something which I can't accurately comment on, @Galaxy Brain.  But subjectively . . . they look good?  Naturally +0/x1 at one end, and +4/x8 on the other make for good benchmarks.  Perhaps the Devs would be willing to share some datamining information on the next three or four most popular difficulty setting configurations for the other benchmarks?