Add more difficult content, ideas welcome!

[Coyotedancer]

'Lots of interesting ideas here... Some of which would absolutely ruin the game for solo players. (It's not ALL ABOUT THE TEAMZ!!1!, guys-) Others make the assumption that everyone and their sister is running a top-end powerhouse build. (No, the entire population of Homecoming isn't made of powergaming min/maxers in spite of that being how forum regulars tend to play-)

 

It's important to keep those things in mind, and to design difficulty options with an eye towards making those settings *optional* rather than the default.

 

Also, endlessly grinding the same few iTrials over and over and over and over and over again, on every single alt, until you were sick to death of seeing them to unlock Incarnates was never "fun". It was tedious.  After awhile, a fair few of us "back in the day" came to actively hate it. Getting rid of that ridiculous End-Game-Raids-Or-Else business, and making the solo path to incarnating characters reasonable was one of the best changes that's been made. Personally, I would argue strongly against ever seeing that mandatory iTrial crap return to the game, rather for new iToys or the old ones. 

[Apparition]

48 minutes ago, chi1701 said:

Ive said this before and I will say it again, I am all for increasing difficulty as long as there will be no archytype blacklisting or preferd acytype only etc

 

That is already the case.  I have personally seen Brutes being asked if they have other characters to switch to as it was felt that Brutes don’t do enough damage and Tankers make better tanks.  Many times, I have seen people being told not to make Corruptors and to make Defenders instead for better buffs and debuffs with similar or better damage.

[chi1701]

12 minutes ago, Apparition said:

 

That is already the case.  I have personally seen Brutes being asked if they have other characters to switch to as it was felt that Brutes don’t do enough damage and Tankers make better tanks.  Many times, I have seen people being told not to make Corruptors and to make Defenders instead for better buffs and debuffs with similar or better damage.

 

Thankfully, I have yet to see this, but increasing the difficulty will probably see more of this.

[Coyotedancer]

26 minutes ago, Apparition said:

 

That is already the case.  I have personally seen Brutes being asked if they have other characters to switch to as it was felt that Brutes don’t do enough damage and Tankers make better tanks.  Many times, I have seen people being told not to make Corruptors and to make Defenders instead for better buffs and debuffs with similar or better damage.

 

I'm reminded of playing a Peacebringer back in the Live days... "Could you maybe NOT bring the squid, Bright? No. You can't bring the big, stompy one, either. No seafood! Go get a Real Character!" 😝 

[Marbing]

56 minutes ago, Apparition said:

 

That is already the case.  I have personally seen Brutes being asked if they have other characters to switch to as it was felt that Brutes don’t do enough damage and Tankers make better tanks.  Many times, I have seen people being told not to make Corruptors and to make Defenders instead for better buffs and debuffs with similar or better damage.

I remember back on live my Corruptor would straight up get dropped in favor of a defender. The same thing would happen to my controller too. Teams preferred the Defender. 
 

That doesn’t happen as much on HC that I’ve noticed but it was DEFINITELY a thing on live. I remember getting kind of ticked off about it actually, led to me creating more Defenders. 
 

I will agree that adding harder content will probably exacerbate this, which is why other forum topics are out there discussing balance issues between AT’s and what the source of those issues are. Despite this, I still very much would like to see some harder content added without replacing causal gameplay.

[KelvinKole]

You can also drive engagement through new game mechanics that don’t necessarily make things more difficult but require a change in player awareness and behavior. 
 

Super Stunners, for example, don’t resurrect if there’s not players in range when they die. I use Kai Push a lot in the Pen Yin task force to move them away from the team right as they are about to die so they can’t Rez and sapp us all. Most teams just huddle around them as they die and power through it, but make the resurrection deal more damage or inflict a mag 20 hold or something and player behavior starts to change. 
 

As a few ideas, we could create enemies that can’t take damage unless under a status effect, Warhulks could do double the current damage when they explode but don’t do any if they are held when killed, council wolves could have a velocity effect that increases their damage as the move, cot mages could blow up the corpses of surrounding minions, sky raider porters could take a nearby player with them when they go (lol!). 
 

these are probably all bad examples, but I think you get the point. Difficulty is only one way to improve engagement, there’s lots of ways to force consciousness and strategic play. 

[Super Atom]

1 hour ago, th0ughtGun said:

I remember back on live my Corruptor would straight up get dropped in favor of a defender. The same thing would happen to my controller too. Teams preferred the Defender. 
 

That doesn’t happen as much on HC that I’ve noticed but it was DEFINITELY a thing on live. I remember getting kind of ticked off about it actually, led to me creating more Defenders. 
 

I will agree that adding harder content will probably exacerbate this, which is why other forum topics are out there discussing balance issues between AT’s and what the source of those issues are. Despite this, I still very much would like to see some harder content added without replacing causal gameplay.

 

Anyone who thinks Brutes/Cor's aren't good to have on teams aren't worth teaming with. I don't like defenders or Masterminds but i would never kick one from my team, that's beyond ridiculous.

Edited July 9, 2021 by Super Atom

[Marbing]

Just now, Super Atom said:

 

Anyone who thinks Brutes/Cor's aren't good to have on teams aren't worth teaming with.

I have noticed HC is more chill about this, most teams I am on don't care at all, lol half the time the team is 4 brutes, 3 blasters, and... me. 🤣

 

But I have had conversations with people in game that have the following rationale:

"I don't need your controller because we do enough damage that your added control is pointless so I'd rather have a Defender because their heals/buffs/de-buffs are better than yours."

 

That's not an exact quote but more the main point of a larger conversation... sigh...

[Marbing]

43 minutes ago, KelvinKole said:

You can also drive engagement through new game mechanics that don’t necessarily make things more difficult but require a change in player awareness and behavior. 
 

Super Stunners, for example, don’t resurrect if there’s not players in range when they die. I use Kai Push a lot in the Pen Yin task force to move them away from the team right as they are about to die so they can’t Rez and sapp us all. Most teams just huddle around them as they die and power through it, but make the resurrection deal more damage or inflict a mag 20 hold or something and player behavior starts to change. 
 

As a few ideas, we could create enemies that can’t take damage unless under a status effect, Warhulks could do double the current damage when they explode but don’t do any if they are held when killed, council wolves could have a velocity effect that increases their damage as the move, cot mages could blow up the corpses of surrounding minions, sky raider porters could take a nearby player with them when they go (lol!). 
 

these are probably all bad examples, but I think you get the point. Difficulty is only one way to improve engagement, there’s lots of ways to force consciousness and strategic play. 

This 100%. While I still think more difficult things could be added, I am much more interested in any content that forces a player/team to PAY ATTENTION to what they are doing. That type of content is far more engaging than just straight difficulty. 

[golstat2003]

On 7/8/2021 at 2:17 PM, Super Atom said:

Wanting to push your character has nothing to do with rewards.

 

True, but many folks have stated they would not play those new difficulty settings without additional rewards.

[chi1701]

24 minutes ago, golstat2003 said:

 

True, but many folks have stated they would not play those new difficulty settings without additional rewards.

 

if rewards are increased how will farming influence/additional rewards affect current market?

[Super Atom]

2 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

 

True, but many folks have stated they would not play those new difficulty settings without additional rewards.

 

The only reason for increased rewards would be +5, which makes sense and wouldn't be that much higher.

 

2 hours ago, chi1701 said:

 

if rewards are increased how will farming influence/additional rewards affect current market?

 

It won't , the increase wouldn't be large enough to make a difference assuming they add a +5 which doesn't seem likely. Farmers already make billions of influence so a billion and 1 won't change much.

 

I don't really enjoy farming, I feel it's insanely boring and not even necessary on Homecoming. People who would use the difficulty increases to farm / powerlevel better doesn't mean anything to me because they do it anyway and worrying about farming / power leveling has done enough damage to City of Heroes while never stopping it.

Edited July 9, 2021 by Super Atom

[Coyotedancer]

3 hours ago, KelvinKole said:

You can also drive engagement through new game mechanics that don’t necessarily make things more difficult but require a change in player awareness and behavior. 
 

Super Stunners, for example, don’t resurrect if there’s not players in range when they die. I use Kai Push a lot in the Pen Yin task force to move them away from the team right as they are about to die so they can’t Rez and sapp us all. Most teams just huddle around them as they die and power through it, but make the resurrection deal more damage or inflict a mag 20 hold or something and player behavior starts to change. 
 

As a few ideas, we could create enemies that can’t take damage unless under a status effect, Warhulks could do double the current damage when they explode but don’t do any if they are held when killed, council wolves could have a velocity effect that increases their damage as the move, cot mages could blow up the corpses of surrounding minions, sky raider porters could take a nearby player with them when they go (lol!). 
 

these are probably all bad examples, but I think you get the point. Difficulty is only one way to improve engagement, there’s lots of ways to force consciousness and strategic play. 

 

And you kill the game for soloists who aren't the "whatever-thing" that's required for those gimmick mobs, along with making it impossible for small teams who don't happen to have matching members, either. 

 

"Bring anything and it'll work" is one of City's biggest strengths. Adding mobs that require particular ATs or power types shoots that in the foot. I don't think that's a great approach.

 

 

 

Edited July 9, 2021 by Coyotedancer

[Super Atom]

1 hour ago, Coyotedancer said:

 

And you kill the game for soloists who aren't the "whatever-thing" that's required for those gimmick mobs, along with making it impossible for small teams who don't happen to have matching members, either. 

 

"Bring anything and it'll work" is one of City's biggest strengths. Adding mobs that require particular ATs or power types shoots that in the foot. I don't think that's a great approach.

 

 

 

 

In an ideal world, you would have certain abilities unlocked through use of the +1-4 system. However, since that is not likely to ever happen in CoH this is an issue people would need to be mindful of, though +0 enemies regardless of gimmick are still gonna get steamrolled. So it'd probably be ok anyway.

[KelvinKole]

2 hours ago, Coyotedancer said:

 

And you kill the game for soloists who aren't the "whatever-thing" that's required for those gimmick mobs, along with making it impossible for small teams who don't happen to have matching members, either. 

 

"Bring anything and it'll work" is one of City's biggest strengths. Adding mobs that require particular ATs or power types shoots that in the foot. I don't think that's a great approach.

 

 

 

I did say they were probably bad ideas….

 

But honestly I thought we were talking about new content to challenge and engage level 50s who have surpassed what the game can offer. I think the 1-50 journey is fine and wouldn’t force all of this on everyone. 

[Haijinx]

A couple of thoughts ...

 

It should not be necessary for Soloists to be able to Solo at max difficulty and max team size.  Sorry, but expecting to solo at +4×8 is not reasonable.

 

It isn't some revelation that baddie power creep fell way behind player power creep.

 

I have doubts the system is granular enough to balance at its current state. 

[wjrasmussen]

5 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

 

True, but many folks have stated they would not play those new difficulty settings without additional rewards.

 

But isn't this about greater challenge?

[Super Atom]

7 minutes ago, wjrasmussen said:

 

But isn't this about greater challenge?

 

It is, people who don't want change or don't understand why there needs to be change just try to make it about something that's irrelevant to be dismissive or disruptive.

 

Currently, we're talking about ways to make the current +1-4 more relevant. Harder enemies and ways around just doing +5 and beyond. This would require no reward increase as the higher rewards are already available, you just get them too easily.

 

If they did do +5, there would be higher XP/Influence on a scale similar to +3 / +4 etc and wouldn't take much adjusting and would make sense within the system.

Edited July 9, 2021 by Super Atom

[wjrasmussen]

12 minutes ago, Super Atom said:

 

It is, people who don't want change or don't understand why there needs to be change just try to make it about something that's irrelevant to be dismissive or disruptive.

 

Currently, we're talking about ways to make the current +1-4 more relevant. Harder enemies and ways around just doing +5 and beyond. This would require no reward increase as the higher rewards are already available, you just get them too easily.

 

If they did do +5, there would be higher XP/Influence on a scale similar to +3 / +4 etc and wouldn't take much adjusting and would make sense within the system.

This  isn't the first time this type of conversation has come about in a game.  There are always people who make it about more rewards.  That was the point of my post.

 

As to difficulty, increasing the + should do it.

[Super Atom]

11 minutes ago, wjrasmussen said:

This  isn't the first time this type of conversation has come about in a game.  There are always people who make it about more rewards.  That was the point of my post.

 

As to difficulty, increasing the + should do it.

 

Well luckily, the game is pre-built with how to deal with rewards so the conversation about them doesn't even need to happen really. It's more XP/INF on a per-determined scale and that's all it ever would need to be.

 

I'd love to see +5 / +6 added, but that won't change too much other than time spent. Newer enemy groups designed for end game is the only real answer (see battalion and the real Rikti plans) but who knows if we'll ever get it.

Edited July 10, 2021 by Super Atom

[wjrasmussen]

9 minutes ago, Super Atom said:

 

Well luckily, the game is pre-built with how to deal with rewards so the conversation about them doesn't even need to happen really. It's more XP/INF on a per-determined scale and that's all it ever would need to be.

 

I'd love to see +5 / +6 added, but that won't change too much other than time spent. Newer enemy groups designed for end game is the only real answer (see battalion and the real Rikti plans) but who knows if we'll ever get it.

while adding new content would be ideal, who is going to do the development?

[Super Atom]

11 minutes ago, wjrasmussen said:

while adding new content would be ideal, who is going to do the development?

 

Well you do something like this and also we've already had new content added through those story arcs so it's not an unreasonable goal.

 

 

Edited July 10, 2021 by Super Atom

[krj12]

An "incarnate" setting for any current TF that can be run at level 50.

 

This setting could do all/any of the following:

1.  Add +1 or +2 to the level of all the mobs.

2.  Add additional powers to any AV encountered in the arc, although an alternative might just be for the "end game" AV.

Some ideas for the additional powers:

   - debuffs

   - ability to summon more allies periodically

   - more DPS

  - an additional level above all the other mobs

   - additional specialized attacks ( perhaps something from the Judgement area )

3.  More mobs

  

[wjrasmussen]

43 minutes ago, Super Atom said:

 

Well you do something like this and also we've already had new content added through those story arcs so it's not an unreasonable goal.

 

 

How about the artwork, animations?

[Super Atom]

Just now, wjrasmussen said:

How about the artwork, animations?

 

Still community volunteers lol It's right in that thread even, people offering their time to work on animations/art work. It's obviously not something that would happen tomorrow, but the option isn't not available