Star Allergies: Causes, means to address?

[Bill Z Bubba]

I don't like leading because it distracts from my meditative killin. But I will lead ITFs and MLTFs when I don't feel like soloing and I don't see anyone else cranking one up.

[Ironblade]

50 minutes ago, rookery. said:

The extreme cases I would agree they probably are fine if the rest of the world disappeared, ala Henry Bemis from Twilight Zone.

hmm....  Was that the bookworm played by Burgess Meredith?  Good episode.

[Zeraphia]

This is my prospective as someone who has lead planned events, and lead many a PUG on probably at least once of every single TF/SF in the game.

 

1. When I go to do an event, I realize that to do that, I have to spend time recruiting people that I typically don't know. When I don't know these people, if I want to finish a TF/SF in a satisfactory time, I have to play certain character combinations because god knows some of these people are just woefully not with the program. They have builds that are focused far too much on control or something that quite frankly the group just does not need to accomplish the tasks. Yes, I'll get flack for saying that, but yes, I could you know, go without the sidekicked 49 Ice Controller immobilizing all the enemies in an ITF group from gathering up. It's quite frankly irritating to me what some people try to bring in to my Task Forces, being practically babysat like an AE farm for minutes on end. That may sound harsh, and that is a generalization, and I recognize I've also met absolutely fabulous players on my TFs/SFs that made my experience great! Then there are PUGs that I've formed (yesterday) on an Apex Task Force, that apparently had no idea or were extremely lazy, did not summon the lores like I asked them to, and were not avoiding the blue patches, were constantly dying, flying around, not paying attention to the AV, etc. that make me very reprehensive to forming another group (I normally finish a TinPex in under 14 minutes each, most the time sub 11/10 - this one took 20). 

 

2. There's also the fact that recruiting/wasting time in itself is kind of "painful/boring" I can turn on a podcast/youtube while doing it, but that doesn't mean it's an invigorating experience, or that I'm enjoying the characters I play. 

 

3. It's just less work overall, if someone is making a good TF I'd like to join, I am very pleased usually, it means I'm with people who at least know how to recruit a group usually, and are driven individuals, and thus I typically have a decent experience (not always the case, but happens to be so quite often). 

 

Do I expect perfection out of people or them to have amazing builds like Fire/Fire or Fire/Kin or Fire/Cold, etc.? No, I don't. However, what I do expect is that you do some form of damage or contribution to the group that's actually needed, and I don't have 4 or so people just being the equivalent of AE doorsitters the whole TF. 

Edited March 18, 2021 by Zeraphia

[Coyotedancer]

I don't mind leading, honestly... but I still rarely make teams. 

 

When I'm playing with one of my non-support characters, it's typically because I want to run solo, or at most duo/trio with a couple of friends.

 

When I'm on the support types, my preference is for mid-level teams... But I can't really form and lead those teams with my characters themselves. They're all finished level 50s. To run at the "support sweet-spot" levels, they need to be exemplared on somebody else's run. 

 

 

Edited March 18, 2021 by Coyotedancer

[Greycat]

2 hours ago, Herotu said:

Players can be encouraged and cajoled into doing many things that they wouldn't do otherwise. 

 

Want players to lead? Invent a new item/currency that is only earnt by leading. 

(mini rant: I thought earning costume parts was a cool concept - I don't know why they got unlocked by default on HC).

 

Bribes don't help, and *yet another* currency would only be annoying.

 

Plus - for instance, I ended up leading a supergroup. That was enough work. Rest of the week, nope, not interested in spending *yet more* of my limited put-up-with-people energy leading anything else.

 

Also, as far as costume parts - that was annoying to have to unlock them. Having them available to create a character *the way you want it from the start* is much better.

[Herotu]

18 minutes ago, Greycat said:

 

Bribes don't help, and *yet another* currency would only be annoying.

Eh ... no.

 

More currencies are industry standard.

 

... and too much freedom is still bad.

 

No more "Free at all costs".

Ironic as that might sound as a slogan.

[Greycat]

1 minute ago, Herotu said:

More currencies are industry standard.

 

Doesn't mean it's a good idea. Not having seat belts in cars was "industry standard" for decades, after all.

[Herotu]

1 minute ago, Greycat said:

 

Doesn't mean it's a good idea. Not having seat belts in cars was "industry standard" for decades, after all.

True enough. That's a decent retort, but I still disagree.

 

What's good about multiple currencies is that you can direct, encourage, cajole the player into specific content/play-styles.

 

In this instance, if you don't want to lead, you get no reward - you don't NEED the reward, it's just some guff.

It's interesting that;

• players see that as a grind to achieve the shiny,
• whereas the developer sees it as incentive for players to do type of content/play-style.

 

 

[Greycat]

6 minutes ago, Herotu said:

What's good about multiple currencies is that you can direct, encourage, cajole the player into specific content/play-styles.

 

 

Just focusing on this - because this, frankly, is not something I can see as good.

 

This is not a job, or shouldn't be. This is a game. Something done for entertainment. Should we say "Not enough people on the other servers are RPing, so let's create a currency that can only (somehow) be earned while RP is detected?"

 

Or one of our alternative currencies now - Vanguard merits. What do people do with them? For the most part - leave them sit or turn them into Reward merits. Maybe grab a heavy once in a while. It doesn't make people *want* to do RWZ content (of which there isn't much) or raid - other than "I'll be turning these into some reward merits." Having the costume parts locked behind them dissuated people from making Vanguard-themed characters (or they made them without the armor,) it didn't encourage (or make any fun out of) having to grind for them.

 

If people *want* to engage in a certain play style, they should do so because they find it *fun.* They shouldn't feel they have to to earn XYZ for something.

[Yomo Kimyata]

I'm trying to identify the problem that we are trying to solve here.  Is it that not enough people are leading teams, so that hurts the gaming population for reasons X, Y, Z?  Is it that "I'm tired of always leading teams and I want someone else to do it?"  Is it something else?

 

I think there is a lot of psychological work on introversion v. extroversion.  Whether or not you *can* turn an introvert into an extrovert, I'm asking myself why you would want to?  Personally, I get annoyed at seeing lots of single players LFT in the channel, but that's only because I'm imprinting my belief system on these nameless faceless people who in real life may not be natural leaders.  So I shrug my shoulders, because at the end of the day it's not hurting me a lick and I'm only hurting myself by getting annoyed.

 

I can kind of come up with a rationale that getting more people comfortable with starting teams would help with the longevity of this game, but I don't see it as a viable, NPV positive venture.  People don't want to play videogames to be told they are wrong, whether that is their degree of comfort in starting a team, or going the wrong way on a TF.  And I'm not inclined to tell them they are doing it wrong.  There may be a way that seems superior to me, and I'll be happy to share that path, but I'm not seeing a clear reason why more people need to be taking the star.  I'm very open to listening to ideas that may change my mind.

[Herotu]

3 minutes ago, Greycat said:

It doesn't make people *want* to do RWZ content

As I recall it did when RWZ was new.

 

  

2 minutes ago, Greycat said:

If people *want* to engage in a certain play style, they should do so because they find it *fun.* They shouldn't feel they have to to earn XYZ for something.

... and that's why there are so few teams. People stay in their comfortable corners, away from everybody else.

Edited March 18, 2021 by Herotu

[Black Zot]

12 minutes ago, Herotu said:

 

... and that's why there are so few teams. People stay in their comfortable corners, away from everybody else.

 

And trying to force them out of those corners will only drive them further in.

[Herotu]

1 minute ago, Black Zot said:

 

And trying to force them out of those corners will only drive them further in.

That's possible.

 

Does anybody here work in behavioural research or even professional games development?

Perhaps we can get some information from you?

[DougGraves]

People in CoH will do whatever they are paid to do.

 

If you want more people to take the star, give an XP or influence bonus for having it.

[twozerofoxtrot]

1 hour ago, Herotu said:

... and that's why there are so few teams. People stay in their comfortable corners, away from everybody else.

 

This may be a server-specific problem. There are no shortage of teams on either Excel or Everlasting.

 

There are literally teams forming at 4am on Everlasting- and if there aren't I can get one going in a few minutes.

 

So the problem is likely more tied to population than lack of incentive. 

[Greycat]

1 hour ago, Herotu said:

As I recall it did when RWZ was new.

 

Are you sure people didn't do it because it was... Idunno, new content in a new (well, refurbished) zone? People didn't ignore Croatoa content because of a lack of C-merits, after all. (I'd comment on redside, but that started off as "expansalone," no crossover with markets or economies, etc. until Going Rogue made that just a bit much with side switching and Praetorian content (and "information" instead of influence or infamy.)

 

1 hour ago, Herotu said:

... and that's why there are so few teams. People stay in their comfortable corners, away from everybody else.

 

Few teams?

 

Where?

[Herotu]

1 minute ago, Greycat said:

 

Are you sure people didn't do it because it was... Idunno, new content in a new (well, refurbished) zone? People didn't ignore Croatoa content because of a lack of C-merits, after all. (I'd comment on redside, but that started off as "expansalone," no crossover with markets or economies, etc. until Going Rogue made that just a bit much with side switching and Praetorian content (and "information" instead of influence or infamy.)

 

 

Few teams?

 

Where?

Umm... I believe it's the topic of the thread,

[Greycat]

1 minute ago, Herotu said:

Umm... I believe it's the topic of the thread,

People not wanting to lead, perhaps. I see people advertising spots on teams constantly. As well as TFs and the like.

 

Which is yet another reason that, no, we don't need another currency or some way to force people who *don't* want to lead a team to do something they don't want to do.

[Heraclea]

5 hours ago, Herotu said:

Want players to lead? Invent a new item/currency that is only earnt by leading.

FWIW there are badges earned by time spent as a team leader, so a reward is already there. 

[TemporalVileTerror]

@Herotu; I've worked in the industry (past tense, close to ten years ago now), AND did a lot of focus on behavioural sciences as part of a couple of my roles during that time.

I posted a comment in this thread last night, but it got pruned out . . . I was admittedly a little snappish in response to . . . stuff I won't get in to again, for risk of this message also going "poof."

 

The short version:  The industry largely operates in the way it does for the benefit of the publishers' financial gains, NOT the players (and not a developers either, frankly).  Pushing players with in-game rewards and incentives to do things they don't actually enjoy and forming habits has been a mainstay since at -least- the early 2000s, when many publishers started employing people like me to twist behavioural studies in to truly sick and twisted shit.

 

Not to be dismissive of players who truly personally enjoy that sort of thing (after all, some people truly personally enjoy sticking sharp objects through their own skin:  Humanity is diverse!), but I -do- know that it was the express intent of many game mechanics introduced over the past twenty years to manipulate players in to -thinking- they're "playing the game," when they're really just trapped in entirely artificial and damaging habit loops.

It's a messy prospect to intentionally re-introduce those sorts of mechanics in to a game like Homecoming:  City of Heroes.  Sure, some players will genuinely enjoy it . . . but I'll -bet- dollars-to-donuts that MOST don't ever want to go back to that hell.

[Techwright]

6 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

I don't like leading because it distracts from my meditative killin.

I've played this way at times.  I have led teams, but I will not lead a team if A) I'm a tank or brute.  I find it too much for my "slow" fingers to both type out leadership dialog and refill recruitments and lead from the front.  B) I'm playing a character with a lot to juggle, like say a mastermind or my illusion/storm controller.  This for the same reason as "A". 

2 hours ago, Heraclea said:

FWIW there are badges earned by time spent as a team leader, so a reward is already there. 

If they truly see it as a desirable reward.  I suspect what DougGraves was alluding to was something universally desired.  Some folks could care less about badges, but XP and INF are desired until at least 50, and for many, long beyond that.

[Lazarillo]

Generally, I'd argue the "means to address" is really, really simple: be the change you want to see.

If people are breaking off from groups when the leader quits, because none of them want to lead, it's because they see that as perfectly acceptable.  If you want groups to stay together, then offer to take the lead and handle it, and don't worry about what goes on in other teams.

[Ukase]

14 hours ago, Sovera said:

Rewards. You're not doing Yin on x8 in 20 minutes. It takes me about 50 minutes at best to solo it because Freaks are a pain between heals and ressurects. If you're just doing it for the merits or for the accolade then hey, sure, but the XP between +1x1 and +1x8 is tremendous.

XP in this game is all but meaningless. It will come, eventually.  Start it, finish it. In Yin, there's a mob of freaks, a mob of freaks with civs to be rescued, a mob, and then a mob of freaks with more civs...I ignore them if there's no reason to mess with them. There's nothing to be gained. XP? I'll get that when I clobber what needs to be clobbered. And, because I finish quickly, I'm off to do the next thing speedily, and make xp as I go. I see no reason why anyone would pursue it. It will come eventually. But the merits, the badges, the sooner you get those, the sooner you're off to the next set of merits and/or badges. 


 

[Ukase]

9 hours ago, Zeraphia said:

This is my prospective as someone who has lead planned events, and lead many a PUG on probably at least once of every single TF/SF in the game.

 

1. When I go to do an event, I realize that to do that, I have to spend time recruiting people that I typically don't know. When I don't know these people, if I want to finish a TF/SF in a satisfactory time, I have to play certain character combinations because god knows some of these people are just woefully not with the program. They have builds that are focused far too much on control or something that quite frankly the group just does not need to accomplish the tasks. Yes, I'll get flack for saying that, but yes, I could you know, go without the sidekicked 49 Ice Controller immobilizing all the enemies in an ITF group from gathering up. It's quite frankly irritating to me what some people try to bring in to my Task Forces, being practically babysat like an AE farm for minutes on end. That may sound harsh, and that is a generalization, and I recognize I've also met absolutely fabulous players on my TFs/SFs that made my experience great! Then there are PUGs that I've formed (yesterday) on an Apex Task Force, that apparently had no idea or were extremely lazy, did not summon the lores like I asked them to, and were not avoiding the blue patches, were constantly dying, flying around, not paying attention to the AV, etc. that make me very reprehensive to forming another group (I normally finish a TinPex in under 14 minutes each, most the time sub 11/10 - this one took 20). 

 

2. There's also the fact that recruiting/wasting time in itself is kind of "painful/boring" I can turn on a podcast/youtube while doing it, but that doesn't mean it's an invigorating experience, or that I'm enjoying the characters I play. 

 

3. It's just less work overall, if someone is making a good TF I'd like to join, I am very pleased usually, it means I'm with people who at least know how to recruit a group usually, and are driven individuals, and thus I typically have a decent experience (not always the case, but happens to be so quite often). 

 

Do I expect perfection out of people or them to have amazing builds like Fire/Fire or Fire/Kin or Fire/Cold, etc.? No, I don't. However, what I do expect is that you do some form of damage or contribution to the group that's actually needed, and I don't have 4 or so people just being the equivalent of AE doorsitters the whole TF. 

This is so beautifully and accurately stated. 

 

[nihilii]

12 hours ago, Greycat said:

Or one of our alternative currencies now - Vanguard merits. What do people do with them? For the most part - leave them sit or turn them into Reward merits. Maybe grab a heavy once in a while. It doesn't make people *want* to do RWZ content (of which there isn't much) or raid - other than "I'll be turning these into some reward merits." Having the costume parts locked behind them dissuated people from making Vanguard-themed characters (or they made them without the armor,) it didn't encourage (or make any fun out of) having to grind for them.

What you're touching on here is not that alternate currencies aren't successful motivators, but rather that the net rewards for Vanguard Merits are too lackluster to encourage pursuing RWZ content specifically.

Warp back to the early Homecoming days where Vanguard Merits had a much better conversion rate, and Mothership Raids were so popular they, in fact, prompted a change.

 

Economic incentives work. If anything, in MMORPGs they work too well. Flip one switch and you change the gameplay landscape.