Anyone else notice a slowly increasing number of people joining groups just to solo?

[PLVRIZR]

Just now, Sovera said:

Are you pro right fork or pro left fork? 😄

 

LOL, I'm pro "stick it with a fork", because I'll be done with it...quickly 😆

[PLVRIZR]

37 minutes ago, Industrious1 said:

the next ITF stompfest on poor Romulus.  

 

In total transparency...he deserves it...every time.

[Coyotedancer]

11 minutes ago, Sovera said:

Are you pro right fork or pro left fork? 😄

 

Isn't the rule "Always go left"? 

[ZemX]

7 minutes ago, Coyotedancer said:

Isn't the rule "Always go left"? 

 

Right!

[Ukase]

I love puns. The highest form of comedy. 

[Songseven]

[Ignatz the Insane]

21 minutes ago, Coyotedancer said:

 

Isn't the rule "Always go left"? 

This was a running gag with my first DnD Pen and Paper group in which a Gnome Illusionist/Thief named Ignatz(and later Ignatz the Insane) was created.  After numerous disasters going right, the group collectively made a rule.  Always go left.

[A Cat]

On 9/29/2021 at 1:47 AM, Sovera said:

 

Of course that is moot if the conversation turns into both sides saying 'no, you're wrong'. Can't help there. Most I can do is repeat my offer from page 1: if we are both on Everlasting (if not I can transfer) I'll join on a level appropriate character and we put up a full team and do a TF where I stick to the team, then we do it a second time where I take the right fork and we compare times. Two times random people should make it a small sample but random enough.

Depending on when, I'm down to be a teammate. I think I've got an alt that is haphazardly slotted and in the appropriate level range for Synapse too for an accurate simulation. To minimize variables, it would be ideal to have the same team both times. Dunno how realistic it is to achieve this though. Another idea is to do an incarnate friendly tf since that would accentuate the overkill phenomenon and thus increase the gulf between having splits or having everyone stick together. 

[PLVRIZR]

1 hour ago, Songseven said:

 

Now THAT's a big weiner...

[Sovera]

We have people up for the experiment. We should convene. I will keep an open mind in case I'm proven wrong. More data is always valuable.

 

We need only decide where, where, and what TF. Bringing levels 50 would skew things IMO with the power creep so level appropriate would be good.

 

 

Synapse is pretty long but pretty low level for individual power to shine as much which seems good. Lots of kill alls which work great for the testing.

 

Citadel is not as long and also involves plenty of kill alls though a lot of travel.

 

Moonfire has its kill all bits and is (mostly) centered in one zone reducing travel time from disturbing the experiment.

[A Cat]

Dunno if this is going too far, but if we're all rich enough, we should ATT everywhere so the travel time is consistent. Even if the next door is...next door. It would take the same time with ATT. 

 

I vote Synapse personally so we don't have to deal with Council cave maps. lol. But I'm up for whatever

[ZemX]

17 minutes ago, Sovera said:

We have people up for the experiment. We should convene. I will keep an open mind in case I'm proven wrong.

 

The way I see it there are three possibilities:

 

Having someone split off solo...

1. Always speeds things up.

2. Always slows things down.

3. Sometimes either (or neither, I suppose).

 

You're doing one experiment, which means:

1. Can be disproven if you fail.  Can never be proved.

2. Can be disproven if you succeed.  Can never be proved.

3. Can't be disproven in one trial (or any number of trials, actually).  Can be proved with enough trials to see at least one of each outcome. 

 

I have already stated a preference for choice 3 in a previous post and, as my position is the only one that CAN be proved and can never be disproved, I hereby declare myself the winner of this thread and, at the very least, the Internet for today.  

 

No, please.. hold your applause.  Thank you!  I will take my winnings in cash or purple IOs. 😈

[Bill Z Bubba]

8 hours ago, Industrious1 said:

Most of the content is literally so easy at 50 that you can do a good chunk of it (with some notable exceptions) with 2-3 skilled players and not break a sweat.  The game did not really compensate for incarnate level power before the servers went down and it shows now that the game is back operational.  

 

Based entirely off of "no incarnate powers slotted" TFs with otherwise cranked to the gills builds I've been involved with, I'd have to argue that the power creep from IOs has been far more detrimental overall, even considering the ridiculousness of Judgement overuse.

[lemming]

A few of my characters have split off from the main to do a quick stress test of my build.  Though normally I won't do that until I have a feel for the team and never with a char with support powers.

And that's not an option with most of the iTrials or other events where one needs to follow protocols to succeed.

All in all, if the leader puts down some rules, then follow them.  If no stated rules, then just don't be a jerk.

[Ukase]

On 9/29/2021 at 2:34 AM, Peacemoon said:

You don’t just want to solo, you want a whole team to watch you solo. 

Maybe these folks are fire farmers who couldn't find any sitters! 

[Doomguide2005]

On 9/30/2021 at 8:21 PM, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Based entirely off of "no incarnate powers slotted" TFs with otherwise cranked to the gills builds I've been involved with, I'd have to argue that the power creep from IOs has been far more detrimental overall, even considering the ridiculousness of Judgement overuse.

      There's definitely a lot of truth here.  Remove all set bonuses, allow generic IOs and all Incarnate Abilities and I'm thinking you'll see a notable drop off in "overpowered".  Now reverse that and use all IOs including sets but no incarnate abilities.  Definitely a drop in power but thinking still pretty overpowering.  Soft capped Blasters, soft capped resist based melee sets, etc., are substantially involved in the power creep.  Then take it up another notch by using both to get where we are now. 

     We get here because sets and incarnate abilities plug holes in otherwise powerful set builds who might have limiting issues but instead have none (or much less pronounced ones).  Typically sets make for very independent builds, independent of major limiting factors such as endurance (recovery), recharge, accuracy (final hit chances).  Incarnate abilities tend to either add direct power regardless of AT (Judgement) or eliminate one or more of the limiting factors making it even easier for sets to further overcome other limits to a build (Destinies).  As a result you get builds that have otherwise several limiting factors.  For example, heavily proc'd builds often overcome multiple strongly limiting issues such as accuracy and endurance.  Sets solve one issue, while incarnates resolve another.  And for power creep/level of power there's a great deal of synergy between the two.

 

[tidge]

40 minutes ago, Doomguide2005 said:

      There's definitely a lot of truth here.  Remove all set bonuses, allow generic IOs and all Incarnate Abilities and I'm thinking you'll see a notable drop off in "overpowered".  Now reverse that and use all IOs including sets but no incarnate abilities.  Definitely a drop in power but thinking still pretty overpowering.  Soft capped Blasters, soft capped resist based melee sets, etc., are substantially involved in the power creep.  Then take it up another notch by using both to get where we are now. 

...

 

 

I have no disagreement with the above, but I am reminded of other threads with many posts on the topic of "make the game harder for me, but don't make me play with debuffs".

 

The game offers challenges, it's just that the game may not offer the challenge that a particular player wants.

 

[Doomguide2005]

     I find it more than slightly ironic.  In many ways we've come full circle("half circle?")  Green Machine, the FRads, and other such "Super Teams" in the time before IOs could boast numbers on their individual members that IOs are either unable or needed in order to reach those values on a character today and as a whole were equally "overpowered" compared to the content.  Now instead of 7 other teammates we've got IOs and Incarnate Abilities to reach those same extremes of power on the individual, teammates optional.

Edited October 2, 2021 by Doomguide2005

[Bill Z Bubba]

6 hours ago, tidge said:

The game offers challenges, it's just that the game may not offer the challenge that a particular player wants.

 

I'd be quite happy to turn on player debuffed, enemies buffed and no insps far more regularly... if it improved rewards at all.

[Aurora_Girl]

40 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

I'd be quite happy to turn on player debuffed, enemies buffed and no insps far more regularly... if it improved rewards at all.

 

Something like...maybe an Emp Merit or two, sort of like the way the iTrials reward for meeting badge requirements?

 

First get of a Master of badge is 5 Emps and a guaranteed purple recipe; each subsequent is a choice between the two? 

 

For each of player debuff, no insps, no temps, enemy buffed: 1 Emp?

[DoctorDitko]

Even just a badge for "Did it the Hard Way" would at least yield bragging rights!

[tidge]

2 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

I'd be quite happy to turn on player debuffed, enemies buffed and no insps far more regularly... if it improved rewards at all.

 

It reduces your annual subscription cost by $1.

[Bionic_Flea]

They would pay me to play?  I'm in!

[Marshman]

The simple solution is, if you are the team leader, you state how missions/tfs are going to be ran in your recruiting or once everyone has joined you state how you would like to approach said missions then ask if everyone is ok with that.  If everyone agrees and you still have someone run off after you've asked that everyone remain together then you can politely ask them to rejoin the fight with the group or politely remove them from team.  You have the power!  I run TFs ALOT.  Some speedy, some at harder difficulty and purposely clearing all maps but I make sure I state that in my recruiting so they know exactly what they are signing up for.

 

As far as clearing or completing maps quicker if one or two don't stick with the group, I've ran to the final floor (let's say 3rd floor) and cleared the entire floor before the rest of the group can reach the final floor.  Again, these were speed runs or if the leader didn't specify a strategy.  I've also joined teams where the leader clearly states how they'd like to approach the missions and I've abided accordingly because I came to help and have fun.  There are enough people on where you can get the exact type of group you want and run content how you want with people who will share in your approach.  It's just a game.  

Edited October 5, 2021 by Marshman

[TJBC]

I have a thought that is maybe not on point but feels related.

 

Why does it seem like every team leader insists on maxing out every mission with 8 players?

 

Could we limit the redundancy of corpse killing and increase the likelihood of teams sticking together if we as a community were more often running smaller teams where everyone felt more relevant?

Edited October 5, 2021 by TJBC