Determining if the Game is Too Easy

[golstat2003]

7 hours ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

 

I don't want to crank up the difficulty.  I'd like to roll back some things (like SOs for level 2s).  But I'm begging the HC powers-that-be to stop dumbing things down.  

 

Again, completely disagree. The SO change was one of the best in a long time.

[Monos King]

46 minutes ago, golstat2003 said:

At higher difficulty levels that players can OPTIONALLY choose? Sure.

The idea wouldn't be to make fighting the enemies more difficult in the sense of increasing their stats or weakening players, so there wouldn't be any change in "difficulty levels". Recall the fights in certain encounters with say Ajax. It isn't hard, but there are things you need to do in order to damage him. Also take fighting something like tsoo. They can be quite challenging when you aren't familiar with their abilities, but once you know to aim for sorcerers, you can begin dealing with the rest. (At least when you aren't on a team that will just DPS them into oblivion.) That sort of thing. More thoughtful, not necessarily more difficult, encounters. Primarily surrounding the definitions of difficult, challenge, and progress as I highlighted in the OP.

 

47 minutes ago, golstat2003 said:

The way to do that is to build optional difficulty that anyone can take on while leaving the base game as is. Something I think you alluded to earlier.

Not quite. I've said this a few times now, but the ease I'm reviewing is one of progression. For pretty much all of the reasons I highlighted previously, another "setting" won't do anything. In this games glory, people already have the options of settings, but the sentiment of "too ease" still exists. I'll again define the reward chasers and role-players. It is within these categories of players you will find "game too easy" sentiment the most. 

 

Reward chasers want their rewards to come at a price, and want things to feel earned. They aren't challenge hunters, they are ease haters. Their motto: if it comes easy, it's worth little. Feel how you want about them. Role-players are the players you might typically associate with "traditionalists", but really they just want to feel like they are contributing to teams they join. Progression holds an element of ease because rewards come easy, and roles are expendable. So you progress through the game very quickly. When you deconstruct what they are actually complaining about, it is an issue of efficacy and expediency. I doubt we can do anything about expedience, there's a lot of ways to move through content and levels quickly. Not to mention people like it. I do actually empathize with reward chasers, but I think that the proposed strategic encounters will make them feel the rewards were truly earned.

 

In short, if the game stays easy (about the same as it is now) challenge wise, but everyone still has the ability to feel useful then I think both sides will be appeased. That I think we can do, if we come up with good ideas for it.

Edited July 10, 2021 by Monos King
Typo

[PeregrineFalcon]

8 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Hard mode is already available through turning off insps, temps, buffing enemies and nerfing players. Hell, you can even turn off enhancements.

Yes, and I wish the people who keep starting these "The Game is too Easy" threads would actually use those difficulty settings. However, they refuse to use those settings. Instead they want the devs to fiddle with the difficulty settings for them, which has the effect of raising the difficulty for the rest of us.

 

Now if I read Monos King right he seems to think that getting to 50 is too fast and easy. I'd definitely recommend that the devs add a "1/2 XP, 1/2 Inf, 1/2 drops & 1/2 Enhancement Effectiveness" setting, with an optional no-deaths/Ironman mode, just for him and his fellow "Game is 2 Easy" acolytes. Then maybe they'll quit starting threads asking the devs to jack up the difficulty for everyone every other week.

 

And yes. I believe that this thread is a not so subtly disguised "The Game is too Easy" thread.

[Monos King]

6 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Now if I read Monos King right he seems to think that getting to 50 is too fast and easy. I'd definitely recommend that the devs add a "1/2 XP, 1/2 Inf, 1/2 drops & 1/2 Enhancement Effectiveness" setting, with an optional no-deaths/Ironman mode, just for him and his fellow "Game is 2 Easy" acolytes. Then maybe they'll quit starting threads asking the devs to jack up the difficulty for everyone every other week.

 

And yes. I believe that this thread is a not so subtly disguised "The Game is too Easy" thread.

Then you are free to go to one of the many "The Game is Too Easy" threads and impugn the conversations there. You can also look at my opinions in other threads. If you're here, I expect you'll read what is being said rather than tangibly obsess over actual conspiracies about my motivations when I have been exceedingly transparent - through both short synopsis' and also walls of text. It would be pointless to disguise my meaning when I could easily make a thread called "Make the Game more Difficult". It is childish to continue assuming deceit just because you disagree with an existing opinion which I have labored to break down and review solely because I have noticed said opinion, and wanted to discuss options with that opinion in mind. Quit categorizing people without looking at what is being said. Stop assuming bad faith. 

 

Find me a single time I have asked for "jacked up difficulty". While I have explicitly stated I believe progression in the game easy, from a point of literal definition, and have looked at why, I have also explicitly stated that I do not personally have much issue with that. I am looking at options that could be interesting that might appeal to those that genuinely DO, and would be cool with those who enjoy the status quo, because even if within your limited sphere you think everything is ok, that does not mean it is the case for everyone. If you are incapable or uninterested in reading my breakdowns, then do not comment. If you are going to ignore all of that and then misconstrue my point anyway, then do not comment. The plague that is overtaking this thread is an immediate antagonization towards an opposing opinion, and is such a disappointing representation of the community it's actually upsetting. 

 

If the thread is too long for you to keep up with, ask me to quote something. Don't do this.

[stonehd]

1 hour ago, Monos King said:

Reward chasers want their rewards to come at a price, and want things to feel earned. They aren't challenge hunters, they are ease haters. Their motto: if it comes easy, it's worth little.

 

Really, though?  If the "Reward Chasers" won't avail themselves to the already in-game ways to make content more difficult (by perhaps NOT using the PTW vendor, NOT power-leveling, etc),  then how can you really say these folks want things to "feel earned" AND "they are ease haters"?  Anyone using Amplifiers and Double XP cannot honestly call themselves "ease haters."

 

I also don't agree with the dichotomy you've set up between your so-called "Reward Chasers" and "Role-Players," as if those are the only two categories of players.  I'm an alt-a-holic, and for me the challenge is in playing all the archetypes, all the powersets, having fun with all of them.  I like how easy the game is now, but I'd never describe myself as a "Role-Player."  Those you describe as "Reward Chasers" sound like what I call the players who think CoH is a game that can be won and who get mad that their are easy options (I'm guessing a lot of Min-Maxers & PvPers, but I'm just guessing since I'm not part of those groups).  And then where do the Badgers fit in?  They feel like they should be part "reward chaser," but I can think of very few badger who want that grind to be more challenging/difficult.   

 

Making the game more challenging - specifically at endgame levels - is a worthy goal, but it involves a lot of moving variables in the game, and you can't solve a multi-variable problem when only paying attention to two ill-defined variables.

 

d, 

[Monos King]

1 minute ago, stonehd said:

I also don't agree with the dichotomy you've set up between your so-called "Reward Chasers" and "Role-Players," as if those are the only two categories of players.

Well, I was trying to divide two groups of players that specifically are prone to complaining about the game being easy. I haven't seen any alt-o-holics ever complain about challenge or difficulty; probably for reasons you just disclosed. My observation is that the easy game sentiment seems to stems from those types the most, not that everyone within those categories feels that way. Definitely didn't intend for it to come off as though those are the only two types of players. 

 

That being said, the category of a reward chaser in particular could definitely be fleshed out. I've mentioned badgers before previously a few pages back when I first defined the two groups, and I missed a bit since the above section was just a recap. By "rewards" I'm pretty much referring to those that increase character stats and utility. 

 

8 minutes ago, stonehd said:

Making the game more challenging - specifically at endgame levels - is a worthy goal, but it involves a lot of moving variables in the game, and you can't solve a multi-variable problem when only paying attention to two ill-defined variables.

Yeah there's definitely more variables to consider. What other factors did you have in mind?

[Monos King]

20 minutes ago, stonehd said:

If the "Reward Chasers" won't avail themselves to the already in-game ways to make content more difficult (by perhaps NOT using the PTW vendor, NOT power-leveling, etc),  then how can you really say these folks want things to "feel earned" AND "they are ease haters"?  Anyone using Amplifiers and Double XP cannot honestly call themselves "ease haters."

Well, I can't speak to whether or not the reward chasers are using power leveling, amplifiers, and double XP boosters. I can give my analogy from earlier, however.

 

On 7/8/2021 at 9:41 PM, Monos King said:

Therein lies the big misconception between two sides, those that claim the game is easy are saying progression is easy, not just encounters. "What if you go seek every challenging encounter to level up, then you can personally feel it's difficult!" Sure, if you want to go solo. If you want to team, then as a result of that optional difficulty, you'll only find congregations of raid-killers running pretty TFs, and naturally those that aren't almighty are left feeling absolutely unnecessary.  "What if I say I only want to team with the underpowered?" Self limitation doesn't suddenly change the reality of the games state, the need to do so just reaffirms it. The ability to simulate difficulty doesn't make the game difficult. And who actually wants to limit themselves of the abilities they have? People would rather test the limits of their strength for challenges, not cripple themselves. You don't see runners racing each other with stilts because they've gotten so fast - they train and undertake greater challenges. When progression defines difficulty, a game extremely easy to progress through is just extremely easy. 

 

Edited July 10, 2021 by Monos King

[Parabola]

My take on this subject is that the ceiling of difficulty for regular play (non challenge conditions) is too low for the level of power available from the IO and Incarnate systems. This isn't a problem for solo play but I feel that the teaming game at high levels suffers as a result of this. There is a teaming dynamic that exists at lower levels which I consider to be the core gameplay experience of CoH and this evaporates when a team has several members who can happily solo at the settings the team is running.

 

21 hours ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

I'm happy to say that with the next batch of new content, we're aiming to do just this using some new methods of dynamic enemy definitions and power assignment.

The new content should be able to be played sub-50 (under enhanced), 50+0 (SOs), or 50+ (IO incarnates) and will change to accommodate and challenge the players depending on their preference for the game. This should enable all player types to enjoy it how they prefer, be it leveling an alt, feeling powerful on their built character, or facing an intense challenge.

Reading a lot of what's being said I think people will be happy with what's coming.

This is controlled via the levels at which the enemies spawn, with enemies at 52+ being given additional powers to make them more dangerous to built incarnate players; Players who wish to play the content at max level and not deal with challenge or the additional mechanics will be able to simply set the difficulty to +0.

That being said, there are currently no plans to retroactively adjust or change previously-existing content's difficulty; But we're always evaluating based on the feedback.

This is quite similar to an idea I posted a while back for enemy buffs that scale with level and team size to give more of a challenge to high level teams. I really like the sound of this! In reference to the comment at the end I would definitely consider retro fitting this to existing content (after seeing how it performs in the wild of course). We have a ton of content in this game and anything added to that is always going to only be a small percentage of the whole. New content clearly takes a long time to develop so it seems sensible and efficient to consider changes that can spice up what we have.

[stonehd]

32 minutes ago, Monos King said:

Well, I can't speak to whether or not the reward chasers are using power leveling, amplifiers, and double XP boosters. I can give my analogy from earlier, however.

 

 

This is what I'm talking about as an ill-defined variable.  You seem to be saying both "here's what Reward Chasers want," while also saying "I can't speak to how they play."  If you don't know basic answer about the playstyle of the group you yourself have defined (and seem to be defending), then perhaps it's time to return to that group and figure out who they are and what they want.

 

1 hour ago, Monos King said:

It would be pointless to disguise my meaning when I could easily make a thread called "Make the Game more Difficult". 

 

Not pointless.  That thread title would have gotten fewer views and much more pushback.  But even though you titled this thread "Determining if the game is too easy," you also immediately began with the assumption that "the game itself is too easy" and asked for discussion/suggestions on how to fix it.   From your very first post:

 

 

On 7/8/2021 at 8:38 PM, Monos King said:

The issue is there is no challenge at all to reaching said omega OP status. Progression is not difficult to do, and that's what is meant when I at the very least say the game itself is too easy.

 

...

 

In synopsis, the game itself is easy because progression to a point where challenges are non-existent is not difficult.

 

If your goal is to DETERMINE if the game is too easy, you should listen to those who say "nope, it's not" without trying to convince them that their concerns are misplaced and we really need to get back on the topic of how to make the game more challenging/difficult/whatever.  

 

1 hour ago, Monos King said:

The plague that is overtaking this thread is an immediate antagonization towards an opposing opinion, and is such a disappointing representation of the community it's actually upsetting. 

 

Funny, I see you as the one antagonistic to others opinions.  So I won't argue, I'll just bow out.   Cheers.

 

d

 

[Monos King]

34 minutes ago, stonehd said:

This is what I'm talking about as an ill-defined variable.  You seem to be saying both "here's what Reward Chasers want," while also saying "I can't speak to how they play."  If you don't know basic answer about the playstyle of the group you yourself have defined (and seem to be defending), then perhaps it's time to return to that group and figure out who they are and what they want.

No I mean that's literally not quantifiable; they may or may not decide to use it, and their usages might vary. This isn't my personal group of buddies I'm talking about. Not everyone is the exact same, I can't make a blanket statement to that extent "every reward chaser is using pay2win powers, double XP booster, and power-leveling" or not, and trying to do so would be extremely disingenuous. And even if I did go and ask every single one I know, there's definitely going to be some I don't know that differ. Frankly, whether or not they do doesn't change anything...it's just kind of an assumed position that you created, and then claimed if they DO hold that position, they can't feel the way they feel. In that event, I direct you to my analogy.

What I can do is make assessments about how they feel because some of them brought those concerns to me in the first place, and then create a classification based on that. If you're interested, I just asked you about factors that you think might be more verifiable/relevant. 

34 minutes ago, stonehd said:

If your goal is to DETERMINE if the game is too easy, you should listen to those who say "nope, it's not" without trying to convince them that their concerns are misplaced and we really need to get back on the topic of how to make the game more challenging/difficult/whatever.

The thread title refers to the presentation of my OP, where I describe why progression in the game is easy. As for trying to convince others their concerns are misplaced, please show a quote of me doing this. 

 

34 minutes ago, stonehd said:

Funny, I see you as the one antagonistic to others opinions.  So I won't argue, I'll just bow out.   Cheers.

Please show a quote of me doing this.

Edited July 10, 2021 by Monos King

[Wavicle]

I definitely think the COUNCIL should be buffed at 40+ for EVERYONE.

 

Other than that, just options, please.

[Luminara]

I'm just starting to work on a cup of coffee, so my brain is mush at the moment, but some form of lateral progression might address some of the issues you've raised, @Monos King.

 

We already have lateral progression in a few ways.  Badge collecting.  Completing all of the story arcs, side missions (the detective and Madame Bellerose stuff) and personal stories in Dark Astoria.  It's a different grind, one which players tend to be more open to accepting, and which feels rewarding when it's completed.

 

More lateral progression of that sort might be an answer, at least for some players.  An example jumping around in my addled skull (i'm really not worth a wet sock until the caffeine kicks in) is going back through old story arcs and adding... I don't know, 50, or 100 extra glowies, one per mission, something like the Letter Writer glowies in the Ouroboros arcs.  Players would have to revisit these missions, or play them on new characters, in order to find them.  Locating all of them unlocks... a unique souvenir (the badge list is apparently teetering under its own weight, rather not make it worse), or an otherwise inaccessible emote.

 

Obviously, this wouldn't be feasible on that scale.  They don't have the resources, that's just the way it is.  But the idea of lateral progression has been working to provide a degree of satisfaction to a lot of players for as long as the game's been playable, so brainstorming something that's possible within the HC team's resource budget (meaning, something that won't make @Piecemeal or @Cobalt Arachne hate life) should be within the ken of the forum regulars.  Just not me right now.  Brain mush hurts, needs more caffeine.

[oedipus_tex]

There are some good thoughts in this thread. Thanks to all for keeping the discussion civil.

 

My personal take on "more difficult" would have a starter template like this:

 

• The Level Shift that is provided at the Alpha Slot would be re-flagged so that it only applies in incarnate content, like Destiny and Lore currently do
• Reward tables would be shifted:
  • Fighting Level 53 enemies provided rewards previously provided for fighting Level 54 enemies
  • Fighting Level 54 enemies would provide somewhat more rewards than before

 

This accomplishes three things:

• Players could use the abilities provided by the game without locking themselves out of being able to easily access +4 challenge level. This is the "harder" part.
• Players would do not like this challenge could fight +3 enemies and retain the same rewards. This the "I'm not interested in forcing anyone to play my way" part.
• The spread of levels on teams is lowered. The sidekick'er would now only be one level higher than his or her sidekick'ed teammates, the same way the pre-end-game works. 

 

I don't personally have any interest in slowing people's progression or lowering rewards. In fact this change would mean people fighting at "true" +4 would be getting more rewards than currently, which they'd deserve, because the fights would be harder. The two biggests requests I have is preserving the challenge of +4 enemies and keeping team level spread closer together so that the pack leader isn't carrying the team as much. 

Edited July 10, 2021 by oedipus_tex

[Monos King]

28 minutes ago, Luminara said:

Players would have to revisit these missions, or play them on new characters, in order to find them.  Locating all of them unlocks... a unique souvenir (the badge list is apparently teetering under its own weight, rather not make it worse), or an otherwise inaccessible emote.

That sounds pretty fun to me, I think that kind of addition would be cool. And yeah, it probably wouldn't be an answer for everyone, but if it's something that doesn't give reason to object, I would put it on the list (assuming devs pick up the interest in it).

 

This sort of de-incentivizing of what makes progression so quick is actually a great perspective. If the means exist, but few people really want to use said means, because of whatever appealing reasons, the saturation of power would weaken.

Edited July 10, 2021 by Monos King

[Monos King]

17 minutes ago, oedipus_tex said:

I don't personally have any interest in slowing people's progression or lowering rewards. In fact this change would mean people fighting at "true" +4 would be getting more rewards than currently, which they'd deserve, because the fights would be harder. The two biggests requests I have is preserving the challenge of +4 enemies and keeping team level spread closer together so that the pack leader isn't carrying the team as much.

I kind of like this idea, it's interesting. But I also feel like it would be hated and no one would want it.

[oedipus_tex]

14 minutes ago, Monos King said:

I kind of like this idea, it's interesting. But I also feel like it would be hated and no one would want it.

 

 

Can you elaborate on why you think people would hate it? Do you think they would just not understand that it's level difference, not absolute level, that determines difficulty? If they opted to, they'd still be fighting +3 enemies, same as they currently are, and getting the same rewards. The only difference would be the ability to crank it up to +4 and be fighting +4s for more reward.

 

You have the ability to fight +4s all throughout the rest of the game, so the relative challenge level should already be familiar. 

 

Edited July 10, 2021 by oedipus_tex

[Monos King]

16 minutes ago, oedipus_tex said:

Can you elaborate on why you think people would hate it? Do you think they would just not understand that it's level difference, not absolute level, that determines difficulty? If they opted to, they'd still be fighting +3 enemies, same as they currently are, and getting the same rewards. The only difference would be the ability to crank it up to +4 and be fighting +4s for more reward

That, but also the implementation would probably be seen as a solution to a problem. I don't like to think of it as matters of "problem and solution" and instead view it as "appealing to preferences", but the mere installation of something like this would probably leave a bad taste in mouths. One that opens floodgates to incarnate nerfs. That's my prediction, so we'd have to address that's not what's happening. Because I genuinely think it should be fine. 

 

There's also the matter that all the higher end TFs and similar content (not trials) would have to get changes to not have certain enemies unfixable from level 54. Because not everyone is an incarnate, and so that content would be like fighting 55s now. Not sure if it would take a lot of effort to go in and do that, but that could fix that issue.

Edit: unless I misread and level 54s aren't getting any stronger with this proposal.

 

 

Edited July 10, 2021 by Monos King

[oedipus_tex]

8 minutes ago, Monos King said:

There's also the matter that all the higher end TFs and similar content (not trials) would have to get changes to not have certain enemies unfixable from level 54. Because not everyone is an incarnate, and so that content would be like fighting 55s now. Not sure if it would take a lot of effort to go in and do that, but that could fix that issue.

 

 

You make a good point here. I hadn't thought about enemies locked at Level 54. I can see how that throws a wrench in my proposal--you're right that as written, they'd get harder for Level Shifted people, which wasn't the intent. Just for clarity, non-level shifted people in this scenario (assuming they were level 49 or lower) would still be fighting a +5 enemy as they currently are, its the Level Shifted people who would be fighting a true +4 instead of a +3 like they are currently. I think there are only a handful of Level 50 Task Forces? It could be handled by making those enemies appear as 53s, or other means.

 

Thanks for pointing out that hole in the idea. I can see why it would need more thought.

Edited July 10, 2021 by oedipus_tex

[Myrmidon]

5 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

 

Again, completely disagree. The SO change was one of the best in a long time.

Agreed. I don’t even use them anymore (except during beta testing) and I am completely for people having SOs as early as possible.

Edited July 10, 2021 by Myrmidon
Autocorrect is The Devil.

[Snarky]

8 hours ago, Monos King said:

One of what I briefed discussed with Lines back at page 1 was an incarnate alternative. The idea of something more versatile, thematic, and appealing than incarnates (but not as strong) was something I want to see how people feel about.

Sounds to me like the "Sentinel" version of incarnates.

 

Look, I always want more theme.  I run a Dark/Dark Blaster main even though I prefer a Ice/Ice Blaster most of the time.  But if you let me customize a Judgement (type of damage, AoE choice Ranged/PB/Rain, secondary effect) I could see knocking it down to 80% damage of the generic version.  Anything less than that I would be no way.  90% is prob fair, but I am willing to compromise down to 80% for the sake of 'perceived fairness"  (I also do not want to do days of math and scientific samples analyses...after geeks like Arcana parse it maybe we could adjust....)

 

So more themed Incarnate choices?  Yes!!!   errrrr....wait a minute.  I still havent won the lottery and do not have a million to donate to the HC staff.  Who the F is going to do all this work?

 

This is the basic problem (besides the side conversations and inherent disagreements) with this thread.  Where the F is it going?  We are having a long design discussion like we are sitting at a corporate meeting looking at next seasons products.  It is not happening.  We are churning through concepts that have almost no chance of meaning anything.  The best we could possibly hope for is a Dev will read this, take away some idea that might affect the smallest decision they make about something in a few months.  small.  lot of effort for real small.

[Snarky]

1 hour ago, Luminara said:

More lateral progression of that sort might be an answer, at least for some players.  An example jumping around in my addled skull (i'm really not worth a wet sock until the caffeine kicks in) is going back through old story arcs and adding... I don't know, 50, or 100 extra glowies, one per mission, something like the Letter Writer glowies in the Ouroboros arcs.  Players would have to revisit these missions, or play them on new characters, in order to find them.  Locating all of them unlocks... a unique souvenir (the badge list is apparently teetering under its own weight, rather not make it worse), or an otherwise inaccessible emote.

 

I too, am on my first cup of java.  But here goes. 

 

I solo Redside about once a year.  Every story arc, every side mission, on every contact.  I stop experience to do so.  It is a labor of masochistic love.  The hate Redside has is palpable, and I revel in it.  

 

I have done this Goldside (to 20) twice on live.  Never on HC.  It was masochistic, but there was no F-ing love.  Agh I hate politics in video games.  

 

I have never completed this task Blueside.  Couple reasons.  The writing.   Damn.  I have been dead drunk and wrote better than that (if you clean up the typos)  But beyond that (and FINALLY to the point) it is nearly impossible to pencil out a route to do a completionist blueside arc.  Because contacts give the same storylines as other contacts and so are "choice activated" but without research (a LOT) you cannot tell which do that. Which contacts are actual unlocks, how to do them. It is near impossible to complete Blueside as is.

 

So, you want to "hide" contacts/story arcs/rewards/souvenirs in there?  Please. write it up carefully.  Because the three people that eventually find it and play it will really appreciate it.

[Monos King]

16 minutes ago, Snarky said:

This is the basic problem (besides the side conversations and inherent disagreements) with this thread.  Where the F is it going?  We are having a long design discussion like we are sitting at a corporate meeting looking at next seasons products.  It is not happening.  We are churning through concepts that have almost no chance of meaning anything.  The best we could possibly hope for is a Dev will read this, take away some idea that might affect the smallest decision they make about something in a few months.  small.  lot of effort for real small.

True, dev time is always kind of the presiding factor. But they have (even in this thread) expressed that if it's popular and desired, it can happen...eventually. So if something like the customizable incarnates we're talking about now somehow got a universal A-Okay, I think it could happen even on the time budget. 

 

I hadn't even thought about something as simple as customizing existing incarnates in exchange for reducing their overall performance though, that's a pretty neat thought. Of that line of "incarnate alternatives" that means we have that idea, and then the breakthrough idea from earlier that I still don't know what would consist of. Do you think a customizable incarnate would be an entire new slot to unlock, or just take perishable materials to do so?

[Snarky]

1 minute ago, Monos King said:

I hadn't even thought about something as simple as customizing existing incarnates in exchange for reducing their overall performance though, that's a pretty neat thought. Of that line of "incarnate alternatives" that means we have that idea, and then the breakthrough idea from earlier that I still don't know what would consist of. Do you think a customizable incarnate would be an entire new slot to unlock, or just take perishable materials to do so?

I like the sideways idea. You pick...cookie cutter judgement or YOUR judgement.  Cookie cutter lore or YOUR lore.  etc.

 

Then again I would love to see more power granted by opening up the last incarnate slots.  I also have promoted the idea of awarding an extra enhancer slot for 100 vet levels, 500 vet levels etc....

[Monos King]

1 minute ago, Snarky said:

Then again I would love to see more power granted by opening up the last incarnate slots.

We'd pretty much definitely need to already have plans for like next level incarnate content if we did actually end up opening up the later slots though. Did you see some of the drafted ideas for them in the AMAs? They were like hilariously insane: nuke level AoE debuffs and chance for one shots.

 

I'd love to see how crazy it would get but first I'd need some toys to test them on. This one would be unpopular, but they'd probably have to be limited to said new content or have exceptionally long cooldowns outside of it in exchange for them being as awesome as I'd hope. I just can't see it being any other way consider what existing incarnates already spells for content now.

[Glacier Peak]

I don't have any comment on the topic at hand, but great job keeping up with the thread @Monos King. Discussions like these tend to devolve in to two camps pointing fingers, so I am glad that at six pages in there hasn't been a thread lock!