Castles and Cottages: Ancient History

[Snarky]

8 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Not disagreeing with you that the Armor Tier 9's need to be looked at. Or that end game Blasters can't become overpowered.

 

But... Master Incarnate Trials aren't supposed to be something that power sets are balanced around. Also, damage isn't a Tanker's primary focus, that's why it's their secondary power set. No one, especially not those soft-capped blasters, should be upset that a Tanker isn't doing damage for 10 seconds.

 

Now that being said if Rage's crash were removed in some way I wouldn't be unhappy about it. I've already mentioned that, as long as it continues to buff damage in some way, it wouldn't break the Cottage Rule.

I agree Master Incarnate Trials are not what the game is balanced around.  However the point (while extreme, my fav) is valid.  The set WILL LET YOU DOWN WHEN YOU NEED IT MOST .  This does not just happen in Master Incarnate Trials.  It happens every two minutes.  Like clockwork. Super Strength is a dumpster fire power set due to Rage.  One of the reasons I switched to Dark/Dark from SS/Invul as my main.  Dark/Dark will never let you down.  It performs steady, and sometimes spectacularly well.  SS is unsteady as a manic/depressive.  Invul is great, until you get around to Toxic/Psi at which point you go from being "lead" to running around looking for medics and defenders to hide behind.  Dark/Dark has neither of those issues.  And if you believe Blasters are good at Tanking in the modern game you should see my Dark/Dark Brute.  Fuggedaboutit.  Great at all damage types.  90% Psi Resist.  He stand in all the pink rings in Minds of Mayhem Incarnate Trial.  Does not matter how many.  (if there are 3-4 I will sometimes hit my heal...lazily.)  The only times you see my Brute scurry for cover is during Magisterium final fight and during Tinpex Battle Maiden fight.  I challenge ANY melee to stand in those patches.  oof.

 

It makes me sad Super Strength is lopsided as can be.  I think of my favorite character types (The Tick...Colossus...) who are not "rage junkies" and all the similar concepts I have.  and I never roll one.  Because the backstory on every Super Strength toon in the city has to include something that addresses why they are so angry.  "Superadine Junky who now works for Arachnos"

Edited April 30, 2021 by Snarky

[SaintD]

17 hours ago, Myrmidon said:

Actually, I really hate it because Super Strength is being held back by the Hulk concept, which is better replicated with Fury. The raging Super Strength character is not prolific in the genre and shouldn’t be the cornerstone concept of the power set.

SS is why the cottage rule isn't a rule.

The set doesn't even really HAVE a gimmick to trash or mess up. It's barren as hell. It's less than barren, Rage ENFORCES a certain attitude upon any character with the SS set, and what else is there that the set revolves around? Some knockdown and a stun in Knockout Blow? Do me a lemon, there's no theme here.

I say, yeah, the easy route is to change Rage to Build Up and buff up the numbers of everything else to compensate because the set is, otherwise, almost entirely single target. It should at least be a FREIGHT TRAIN of single target if that's all you're gonna have.

My personal preference would be to add more AoE. Make Haymaker an on target AoE like Spinning Kick. Look at that animation. You don't even have to change anything about it.

[Myrmidon]

20 hours ago, Taboo said:

 

Would you take Rage with less crash and no stacking?

 

 

19 hours ago, arcane said:

Less/no crash would have to mean less buff too or less uptime to be balanced.

We had the option of both in Page Four before that change was reverted, as Rage didn’t crash if it didn’t stack. That would have been a bearable change, however, I am genuinely curious to see what @Captain Powerhousecomes up with in a future update.

[Judasace]

On 4/27/2021 at 1:04 PM, Night said:

There is a server out there, Rebirth, which keeps things as they were, so you can play in the old ways if you want. This one already made a ton of beneficial changes to reducing grind, improving FUN and adding/buffing up various power sets, even Energy Melee more recently, and there's still plenty more that need the treatment (Regen anyone?).

I don't think you understand what violating the cottage rule looks like. You're right that Rebith doesn't violate it, but neither has HC, thus far. Making balancing adjustments and the kinds of moderate changes HC has made don't violate the rule. For a look at a server that does violate the rule, go play on the Cake Evolution server. Not just the changes they've made to power sets (like moving controller pets to Tier 2, then making the pet abilities godlike), but making freeform sets, and totally new sets with insane power levels that make soloing incarnate trials as challenging as the "Twinshot" arc. That's the kind of craziness that ensues when you start mucking with the fundamental balance of the game and changing the core of the way power sets work and how they're designed. And for all the added "fun" (Read:Grossly OP insanity) that Cake has (and which lasts for about 5 minutes before you realize how boring it is) it probably has fewer actual players than Rebirth, at least from my experience on both servers.

 

[Troo]

2 hours ago, Judasace said:

but neither has HC, thus far

 

ehhhh

I don't think this is troo.

While attention and efforts have been made to keep functionality, there have been changes. Sometimes justified, sometimes weakly justified.

[arcane]

33 minutes ago, Troo said:

 

ehhhh

I don't think this is troo.

While attention and efforts have been made to keep functionality, there have been changes. Sometimes justified, sometimes weakly justified.

I don’t think a single HC change has been a complete violation. Read previous posts for elaboration.

[siolfir]

7 hours ago, arcane said:

I don’t think a single HC change has been a complete violation. Read previous posts for elaboration.

I would disagree, although in the cases where I feel it was violated I also feel that it was a change for the better. But different people in the thread are interpreting it differently.

 

I already mentioned Stun and how it actually broke the IO set rule of thumb, and even if you're allowing "the ability was moved to a different power" it was done so as a charge-gated secondary effect to a (primarily) damage power. The set has plenty of single target stun and didn't need it, which is why there were so few complaints.

 

You could also argue several other instances where the primary purpose of the power changed, although the power kept the allowed IO sets that it slotted. Infiltration and Touch of Fear are some examples, but the OG devs also have Cobra Strike and Clobber that fall in that category as well.

[_NOPE_]

Anyone that knows me, knows that I can be very "VERBOSE", but I feel I need to say a couple things here, and I'll try to be succinct about it:

1. As far as the Cottage Rule itself goes and whether to follow it or not, I do NOT believe that's an "either/or situation". The way that Incarnate powers work, where you can CHOOSE to have one ability or another, shows that you can have BOTH. City of Heroes has ALWAYS been about freedom and choice, from the start. We can apply a similar technology to existing powers - if a good portion of the player base wants Build Up to build a small cottage rather than boost your damage and ToHit.... then the option COULD be made to either pick "vanilla" Build Up OR "Cottage" Build Up and lock that pick into place until the next respec. Its possible, we have the technology. As a programmer by trade, I know that code can ALWAYS be rewritten, the question isn't "is it possible?" It always *IS*. The question is rather "is the juice worth the squeeze?" Is the time and labor it would take worth the ability to allow for that greater freedom of choice. I for one, think it is, Standard Code Rant be damned in this case - 
2. @Tyrannical SHAME on you for crapping all over the work and legacy of a past developer that you have admitted you haven't even had direct interactions with. The man has actually been a personal acquaintance of mine for a number of years and I KNOW for a fact that he is a very intelligent and thoughtful person. You would do well to, rather than throw around insults and/or insinuations of ineptitude, consider walking a mile in his shoes. Consider the position of a person whose work will affect the lives of thousands of people, half of which you'll probably tick off with ANY decision that you make. Imagine yourself in that place, having to make those kinds of decisions, and knowing that your very livelihood depends on keeping your job. If you were to consider that, then perhaps you might see how power changes might become more... deliberate and conservative over time.

Or, just keep trashing someone that probably won't come around here to try to defend themselves, if that actually makes you feel better, I suppose.

[Alchemystic]

4 hours ago, The Philotic Knight said:

 

1. @Tyrannical SHAME on you for crapping all over the work and legacy of a past developer that you have admitted you haven't even had direct interactions with. The man has actually been a personal acquaintance of mine for a number of years and I KNOW for a fact that he is a very intelligent and thoughtful person. You would do well to, rather than throw around insults and/or insinuations of ineptitude, consider walking a mile in his shoes. Consider the position of a person whose work will affect the lives of thousands of people, half of which you'll probably tick off with ANY decision that you make. Imagine yourself in that place, having to make those kinds of decisions, and knowing that your very livelihood depends on keeping your job. If you were to consider that, then perhaps you might see how power changes might become more... deliberate and conservative over time.

Or, just keep trashing someone that probably won't come around here to try to defend themselves, if that actually makes you feel better, I suppose.

 

I think your personal relationship is affecting your objectivity, Castle is a professional, and as such that opens him up to the scrutiny and criticism of the general public. While I may not have had much direct interaction with him I am completely capable of forming an opinion based on personal observation and secondary data, so insinuating I have no right to express my views simply because I dont share your perspective of things is the only shameful thing here.

 

I'm not oblivious to the fact he probably had it hard, but you know who has it harder? The Homecoming team, and they've accomplished far more in their two years of solo powers development than Castle had in his. Hell, if were going by a two year timescale, how about the two years before Castle was lead powers dev? Or the two years after he resigned? Why do we see more active powers development in those timeframes than we do when Castle was part of the team? Its stuff like that that causes many of us to question the merit of Castle's position, and his development choices.

 

But all this is besides the point, this isnt about whatever feelings you or I have about Castle, this is about how his "legacy" is being weaponized to attempt to discourage progress here and now, in a game that no longer has anything to do with him.

 

So whether we share the same sentiment on Castle or not, I'm sure we can both agree that the Cottage Rule should never be used as a tool to attack a person's ideas.

 

 

Edited May 2, 2021 by Tyrannical

[Xeres]

I've refrained from posting here because I'm still not sure what constitutes the cottage rule and what does not.  Before I begin let me just mention my mindset here - if no changes were made to this game since the launch (or revelation) of the HC servers then I would be fine with it.  I liked the game fine enough as it was.  I appreciate the changes the devs have done so far, and have been happy with them for the most part.

 

But, I feel that, to quote a great Reebok commercial, "if it isn't broken, then there is no need to repair it".  Yes, rage crash.  I get it.  Does that make Super Strength broken?  To some, maybe, but seeing Super Strength's popularity, I don't think it is.  T9 defensive powers?  I haven't taken one on any character.  Not working right?  Probably, but most haven't been working right since inception.

 

Both of these issues I wouldn't mind the devs looking at.  Carefully.  What I am more afraid of then improving these powers is for the devs to "New Coke" the game (Google it if you're unaware).  So, cottage rule?  If that means I don't want "progress" because I'm fearful of the game becoming an unrecognizable version of itself, then yes, I believe in the cottage rule.

 

That said, the devs haven't shown they are willing to go down that road (yet), and I'm grateful for that.

[Snarky]

20 hours ago, arcane said:

I don’t think a single HC change has been a complete violation. Read previous posts for elaboration.

officer i do not think i was "completely" speeding.  

 

Look, I hate the cottage rule.  Mainly because it is the underpinning of holding onto crap that was designed poorly and/or never worked the way intended.  "We discovered America!"  um, there were people here already.  "Shhhh, stop ruining tradition."  

 

Homecoming is moving FORWARD in a conservative way.  They are evolving the game, and they are doing so with their own "cottage rules" that they may/may not violate themselves at a certain point.  From what I can tell they are doing a great job given limited time resources and a funky old bag o' code.  By conservative I mean they are looking at changes as carefully as possible and testing/revising and possibly even scrapping the changes before dumping them on a community that loves the game.  As is.  Warts and all.

 

But damn, there are some warts I want removed.  Which are different than the gamer next to me.  or the gamer over there.  or the gamer that just showed up who is looking for "old CoH"  The current Devs are trying (and again, doing a great job) at keeping all those gamers happy

[arcane]

1 hour ago, Snarky said:

officer i do not think i was "completely" speeding.  

 

Look, I hate the cottage rule.  Mainly because it is the underpinning of holding onto crap that was designed poorly and/or never worked the way intended.  "We discovered America!"  um, there were people here already.  "Shhhh, stop ruining tradition."  

 

Homecoming is moving FORWARD in a conservative way.  They are evolving the game, and they are doing so with their own "cottage rules" that they may/may not violate themselves at a certain point.  From what I can tell they are doing a great job given limited time resources and a funky old bag o' code.  By conservative I mean they are looking at changes as carefully as possible and testing/revising and possibly even scrapping the changes before dumping them on a community that loves the game.  As is.  Warts and all.

 

But damn, there are some warts I want removed.  Which are different than the gamer next to me.  or the gamer over there.  or the gamer that just showed up who is looking for "old CoH"  The current Devs are trying (and again, doing a great job) at keeping all those gamers happy

I disagree 😄

[Troo]

4 minutes ago, Night said:

You're welcome to invite Castle to make an account and add his input here, it's an open forum. You may know him personally but from average perspective, we can only judge him by his actions on the forums, which weren't very favorable as far as opinions seem to go.

 

You never know. They might already be here.

[tidge]

Harrumph. Extremely rarely I feel like 'cottage rule' is invoked to mean "go stay in your cottage until I come to burn it down so you can move into a new cottage." Other times I think it's more like "you have a nice cottage here, you should stay in it while your neighbors move into McMansions." That's just the voice I hear in my head, I don't mean to imply that people really feel that way.

 

Personally, I wish we'd just drop all references to the "cottage rule" and debate possible changes on the merits.

 

I don't want to revisit the Energy Melee changes.. it's not what I wanted, but the set is more fun to play than it was. I don't think the "cottage rule" really had much to do with the recent HC changes.

 

Personally, I think that the first (level 6) Mastermind 'train/equip/fishcakes' power should be completely replaced with a different power (and bake the 'training' into all the henchmen when summoned) since it strikes me as absurd that henchmen you summon with higher level powers need a one-time buff from a lower-level power. I don't think the cottage rule applies to this circumstance either, except to avoid critical thinking about the Mastermind AT as it existed on CoV launch day.

[arcane]

28 minutes ago, tidge said:

Personally, I wish we'd just drop all references to the "cottage rule" and debate possible changes on the merits.

One of the merits of a possible change is how players will receive it. We can stop invoking the cottage rule if you just despise those two words, but we absolutely should not stop invoking its more wordy version: “Hey, some players happen to like that functionality you’re asking to be completely thrown away”.

 

And no, your proposed Mastermind change would have no relevance to the cottage rule. People claiming the cottage rule is something you invoke to oppose *any* kind of change are simply incorrect. The proposed change could be relevant to power creep depending on what you put there in the two new empty slots, but, if it was just more attacks (as opposed to say, a powerful AoE buff), I wouldn’t see it as much power creep.

 

Side note regarding MM’s: is there really anything about them that CoX fundamentally did wrong, or could it just be a problem of AI-reliant pet classes in general? I can’t say my GW2 Necromancer felt all that different when spec’d to the minions/death magic/etc. Strong defenses, strong offenses, but annoying to control and just felt lame half the time.

Edited May 2, 2021 by arcane

[tidge]

57 minutes ago, arcane said:

And no, your proposed Mastermind change would have no relevance to the cottage rule. People claiming the cottage rule is something you invoke to oppose *any* kind of change are simply incorrect. The proposed change could be relevant to power creep depending on what you put there in the two new empty slots, but, if it was just more attacks (as opposed to say, a powerful AoE buff), I wouldn’t see it as much power creep.

 

For fairness, I only suggest removal of THE FIRST henchmen upgrade, not BOTH henchmen upgrades. I've been playing MM for a LONG time and the SECOND upgrade 'feels right' to me. I write this as a player who levels characters up through content, as opposed to taking to the streets for the first time as a freshly minted level 50.

 

I definitely think the replacement power should some sort of pet (toggle or rechargeable, either can be made to balance IMO) for two reasons:

• It would allow Mastermind ATs that don't have a rechargeable pet to slot the Aura enhancements that otherwise have to go into the henchmen, bringing more parity to the different primaries
• A buff pet that helps boost the lower tier henchmen (say, by +accuracy) would allow the T1 henchmen to be more than Bodyguard-mode fodder once they start suffering from level-shift penalties for a lot of content. As it is: Masterminds have to go into a power pool (Leadership) to get that sort of help for their henchmen.

Personally, I don't care if my proposed "buff pet" works on the MM, or other players as long is it helps the henchmen. I definitely think it wouldn't be upsetting the apple cart (i.e. introducing power creep) to bring some parity to the slotting aspects of Masterminds.

[arcane]

2 hours ago, tidge said:

 

For fairness, I only suggest removal of THE FIRST henchmen upgrade, not BOTH henchmen upgrades. I've been playing MM for a LONG time and the SECOND upgrade 'feels right' to me. I write this as a player who levels characters up through content, as opposed to taking to the streets for the first time as a freshly minted level 50.

 

I definitely think the replacement power should some sort of pet (toggle or rechargeable, either can be made to balance IMO) for two reasons:

• It would allow Mastermind ATs that don't have a rechargeable pet to slot the Aura enhancements that otherwise have to go into the henchmen, bringing more parity to the different primaries
• A buff pet that helps boost the lower tier henchmen (say, by +accuracy) would allow the T1 henchmen to be more than Bodyguard-mode fodder once they start suffering from level-shift penalties for a lot of content. As it is: Masterminds have to go into a power pool (Leadership) to get that sort of help for their henchmen.

Personally, I don't care if my proposed "buff pet" works on the MM, or other players as long is it helps the henchmen. I definitely think it wouldn't be upsetting the apple cart (i.e. introducing power creep) to bring some parity to the slotting aspects of Masterminds.

It would be nice if each primary had a temporary pet power (Hell on Earth, Soul Extraction, Gang War) AND a reasonable pet buff (the others). It is a bit silly to me that the former three sets seem more enticing to me solely on the basis that they can fit the pet aura procs  in so much easier. And the pet buff powers would be cool with reasonable uptimes. Then maybe make the other power slot a melee attack or something.

[tidge]

18 minutes ago, arcane said:

It would be nice if each primary had a temporary pet power (Hell on Earth, Soul Extraction, Gang War) AND a reasonable pet buff (the others). It is a bit silly to me that the former three sets seem more enticing to me solely on the basis that they can fit the pet aura procs  in so much easier. And the pet buff powers would be cool with reasonable uptimes. Then maybe make the other power slot a melee attack or something.

 

You had me up until the bolded part. Masterminds can already slot Brawl, should they desire a melee attack. The End and Damage penalties for MM direct attacks don't need any change... they can stay in that part of the hovel... err, cottage.

[oedipus_tex]

I'd feel more comfortable with this discussion if we didn't bring up individual developers by name, live game devs in particular. This game wasn't a hobby for them, it was their career. I think it's fair to critique designs. It feels pretty unfair to me though to be building on these folks' creations years later while dragging them as individuals.

[tidge]

 

Snipping away some inflammatory bits, to pile on:

On 4/29/2021 at 8:25 AM, Snarky said:

The Tier 9s on so many Armor sets.  F-ing useless.  I'm looking at you Invulnerability.  But, nooooooo Don't Change It!  That would violate... erm.  Our right to be stupid!  Keep that non functioning thing on there forever.  Worship the cottage.  Bow down before ignorant past decisions and worship and grovel like the dogs you are.

 

The Invulnerability T9 (as well as the T9 in many other Defense/Resistance sets) never changing is IMO something that fits really well under the terms of the "cottage rule", but (from my casual observances) the "cottage rule" only occasionally gets invoked when some rather radical replacement suggestions are proposed. I feel that such invocations miss the greater point that the original "cottage" was pretty shabby, and subsequent changes to the game have only drawn attention to how bad it was all along.

 

The Invulnerability T9 was never really that good; I only EVER used it occasionally when "street sweeping" or in certain missions... and even then it was of questionable use while Inspirations existed. In the "modern" era of Enhancement Globals and set bonuses, I agree that it is nigh-useless. (W00T, we can use it to mule an Global, just like almost every other power in the primary!).

 

Because I can't help myself: IMO, in order for the Armor T9s to be useful, they have to provide something ORTHOGONAL to the rest of the primary as opposed to be being just a LARGER MAGNITUDE "more of what you have already perfected using the T1 thru T9". Look at which pools the players dip into INSTEAD of taking the T9... this will give folks an idea of what players want and would find useful instead of the useless power. There is a LOT more to being a "better survivor" than MOAR Resistance/Defense (but with a crash!), but I am afraid people will have to let those primaries out of their hovel, err "cottage".

 

[cranebump]

On 4/27/2021 at 12:21 PM, MTeague said:

I don't expect Regen to become "that strength which in old days moved earth and heaven".

 

Extra points for Tennyson.:-)

[MTeague]

On 4/30/2021 at 6:54 AM, Snarky said:

Invul is great, until you get around to Toxic/Psi at which point you go from being "lead" to running around looking for medics and defenders to hide behind.  Dark/Dark has neither of those issues. 

I mean, they have these nice things called Set Bonuses, and you can stack them to help cover a sets weak points. 

Sure, Vanilla Invulnerability has a giant gaping weakness there. Exactly as it's intended to have. 

 

It's not that hard to focus your set bonus selection for Toxic/Psi resist and produce an Invulnerable character who pretty much says "Bring it" regardless of damage type. 

Are you going to get to 90% psi resist?  Probably not. How often does matter?  Perhaps on a verrrry specific challenge mode of a few particular trials.  And on those trials, you're not alone and it's no great sin to let your SUPPORT characters.... SUPPORT you!

[MTeague]

21 hours ago, tidge said:

 

You had me up until the bolded part. Masterminds can already slot Brawl, should they desire a melee attack.

Boxing/Kick/Crosspunch are always options as well. 

[Taboo]

On 4/29/2021 at 2:39 PM, Snarky said:

How many characters in the comics that have Super Strength have rage issues.

 

Super Strength and Rage are a berserker concept. Increased strength followed by being winded or fatigued are very common..

[PeregrineFalcon]

8 minutes ago, Taboo said:

Super Strength and Rage are a berserker concept. Increased strength followed by being winded or fatigued are very common..

Thank you for the insight, Captain Obvious. After 17 years of City of Heroes no one realized that until you mentioned it. You've truly done everyone a great service.

 

Now, how about Superman's "rage issues"? Or Colossus? What's that you say? Neither of those characters have rage issues? Yeah, no kidding. So why is every super strength character in the City of Heroes universe required to be a rampaging psycho with rage issues?