Nerf Level Shifts

[Bionic_Flea]

I hope that everyone with concerns about this new TF hits the test server when it comes out and tries it with and without hard-mode at least once, if not several times with different ATs, powers, levels, and slotting --  from god-like incarnates to mid-level SO only builds -- and then give their constructive criticism.

 

I have a feeling it is coming Soon^TM. 

 

My question is:

 

[Coyotedancer]

6 minutes ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

Playing on Hard Mode is a big change in how you play the content, players who think it's going to just be more of the same that takes a little bit longer may find themselves surprised.

 

If they actually start wanting my support-oriented Defenders instead of asking if I could bring one of the Blasters instead, ultimately I'm for it. 👍

[Cobalt Arachne]

33 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

If this means that there will be NPCs with auto-hit or stupid high tohit that blows through all defense and damage types that have no resists to (kinda like Hami "damage") then it won't be worth the extra rewards.

Hard mode enemies will have higher baselines stats, but nothing unfair and no absolutes. Nothing like big special damage types or auto-hits.

That being said, in a state of the game where a Defender can soft cap S/L/E defense with four power choices and minimal slotting investment, a new baseline was needed so that enemies can actually threaten players and was a requirement, but there is some new nuance and specifics regarding that, it will make more sense when the content is available on Brainstorm.

Keep in mind that enemies that cannot in any meaningful way threaten a team of players means control and support roles have absolutely no value. Enemies will be dangerous again, but playing poorly is the real killer. In testing the primary culprit of most deaths was the team splitting and aggroing too many mobs at once.

[Uun]

4 minutes ago, Coyotedancer said:

It's just going to be interesting to see what happens when those new "optional" modes become available to that not-minor segment of the player bases who will always go for the biggest reward per task chosen.  Unless they put a real hit on completion speeds, the odds are good they'll eventually become the default.... Sort-of like +4/x8 when running Council scanners. (Or really anything, for most of the power-player set-)

Prior to HC, I spent a number of years playing SWTOR. Their Operations (8-16 players) have three modes, Story, Veteran (formerly Hard) and Master (formerly Nightmare). Their Flashpoints (4 players) also have thee modes, Story, Veteran (formerly Tactical) and Master (formerly Hard). It's quite common for players to run content at all three levels. Running Master level operations or flashpoints not only requires better gear, but also requires specific knowledge of the encounters and a much greater time commitment. It is by no means the default.

[Cobalt Arachne]

29 minutes ago, Uun said:

Prior to HC, I spent a number of years playing SWTOR. Their Operations (8-16 players) have three modes, Story, Veteran (formerly Hard) and Master (formerly Nightmare). Their Flashpoints (4 players) also have thee modes, Story, Veteran (formerly Tactical) and Master (formerly Hard). It's quite common for players to run content at all three levels. Running Master level operations or flashpoints not only requires better gear, but also requires specific knowledge of the encounters and a much greater time commitment. It is by no means the default.

This is a good comparison; Hard Mode (at least on the highest level we created) will be very difficult to rush through. It's going to take a little longer and require more tactical approaches to pulls and that will conflict with a lot of common 'Go-Go-Go' playstyles that are commonly seen right now, where the only real metric for success is speed, because the content rarely is dangerous.

It also means requiring more time to play the content if you do Hard Mode, since speed will get you killed. People can certainly play the new Strike Force going fast, but they're going to have a rough time thinking they can rush Hard Mode as easily. But those who do Hard Mode will walk away with a hefty amount of goodies for that time spent.

[Wavicle]

4 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Here we go again...

 

So basically you power munchkined your characters full up with Purple IO sets and all T4 Incarnates and you're complaining that the content is too easy? Wow. What a shocker. Your character became Superman in a superhero game. If you'd rather play Lame-O the Wonder Clown instead of Superman then go play WoW.

 

 

Your assumption is 100% incorrect. I have literally ONE Purpled out T4 Incarnate. The vast majority of my toons have nothing more than t3s (IF that) and a combination of procs and generic IOs.

[PeregrineFalcon]

3 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Your assumption is 100% incorrect. I have literally ONE Purpled out T4 Incarnate. The vast majority of my toons have nothing more than t3s (IF that) and a combination of procs and generic IOs.

You get that I wasn't talking about you personally, right? I was talking about people in general. Sure you do.

 

Also, both your post and your signature prove my point. If you don't understand why then perhaps you might want to ask someone who's smarter, and more patient, than I am to explain it to you.

[Wavicle]

1 minute ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

You get that I wasn't talking about you personally, right? I was talking about people in general. Sure you do.

 

Also, both your post and your signature prove my point. If you don't understand why then perhaps you might want to ask someone who's smarter, and more patient, than I am to explain it to you.

 

I have no idea what you're talking about and frankly I don't think you do either.

[arcane]

2 hours ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

This is a good comparison; Hard Mode (at least on the highest level we created) will be very difficult to rush through.

Not sure I’m fond of the implication that there’s going to be an easy version of hard mode. Can we wrap up the extra rewards in something that you’re actually certain is difficult..

Edited September 30, 2021 by arcane

[Wavicle]

1 minute ago, arcane said:

Not sure I’m fond of the implication that there’s going to be an easy version of hard mode. Can we wrap up the extra rewards in something that you’re actually certain is difficult..

 

I don't think there's anything wrong with gradations of additional difficulty, just as there are gradations of the current difficulty options.

[Cobalt Arachne]

17 minutes ago, arcane said:

Not sure I’m fond of the implication that there’s going to be an easy version of hard mode. Can we wrap up the extra rewards in something that you’re actually certain is difficult..

I wouldn't say it's an 'easy version' of hard mode. 

All the hard mode versions activate the 'hard mode' exclusive powers on the enemies, which is where the core of the difficulty comes from.

The primary difference between the three is that they will lock you into +2/x8, +3/x8, and +4/x8 respectively, regardless of team size and the overall enemy stat baseline increases with each level.

[Wavicle]

NGL that sounds pretty great.

 

Here's hoping it can be imported to as much content as possible.

[Biff Pow]

The whole point of the Incarnate System is to make you overpowered.

[Wavicle]

15 minutes ago, Supertanker said:

The whole point of the Incarnate System is to make you overpowered.

 

Yes, that's true. However, it is very difficult to balance the game when team members relative levels vary by so much. The sidekicking/mentoring system works pretty well when it restricts everybody to within 1 level of the mission owner. Adding the +levels really throws things out of whack.

[Aurora_Girl]

Something that probably has already been mentioned, but I think it bears repeating:

 

Not everybody (and I'd wager a significant amount) wants this game to be harder.

[Aurora_Girl]

22 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

 

Yes, that's true. However, it is very difficult to balance the game when team members relative levels vary by so much. The sidekicking/mentoring system works pretty well when it restricts everybody to within 1 level of the mission owner. Adding the +levels really throws things out of whack.

 

What content are you doing that's so out of whack? Bringing a sub-50 into DA content? Running ITFs with non-50s? 

 

What is "out of whack," anyway?

[Wavicle]

4 minutes ago, Aurora_Girl said:

Something that probably has already been mentioned, but I think it bears repeating:

 

Not everybody (and I'd wager a significant amount) wants this game to be harder.

 

Not everybody wanted it to be made easier, but that's exactly what happened.

[Cobalt Arachne]

32 minutes ago, Aurora_Girl said:

Not everybody (and I'd wager a significant amount) wants this game to be harder.

This is fair and something we always consider in our design, new content will never be locked behind any higher difficulty.

 

People who enjoy the game casually, can continue to do so, exactly as they have before.

 

The new settings are to give options to the people who want a more engaging endgame, enjoy using their characters at their strongest (without self-handicaps) to overcome meaningful challenges, and enjoy designed difficulty since there is very little content left that is truly conducive to that style of playing the game anymore.

 

We want everyone to be able to play City of Heroes and enjoy it how they like, which includes people looking for a challenge just as much as it includes casual players, role-players, badge hunters, PvPers, etc.

[macskull]

2 hours ago, Wavicle said:

Here's hoping it can be imported to as much content as possible.

If I recall correctly from some earlier discussions, the new difficulty tech is taking a long time to implement because there's no easy way to do it but the hope is for it to be easier in the future. I'm not sure I'd expect much existing content to be backfit with the new stuff though.

[Wavicle]

4 minutes ago, macskull said:

If I recall correctly from some earlier discussions, the new difficulty tech is taking a long time to implement because there's no easy way to do it but the hope is for it to be easier in the future. I'm not sure I'd expect much existing content to be backfit with the new stuff though.

well, I really hope it is, because I would expect it to take a lot longer to make a lot of new content than it would to add new options to existing content...

[twozerofoxtrot]

13 hours ago, Luminara said:

You apply some meaning to the existence of a couple of weeks of grinding, but there was none.  Whether it takes you a year to hit T3 Alpha, or a couple of minutes, the end result is identical.  You're still +1 in the end. 

 

I know we've drifted from the this point into more broadly agreed-upon topics of conversation, but I'd like to reinforce Luminara's point here because it's a good one:

On Rebirth I had my T3 Alpha in 3 days (~10 hours) of play after hitting 50, using only shards (I was hording threads for the later unlocks). The time to godhood was nearly infinitesimal. On Rebirth. With its dramatically lower player count. I just advertised and ran the TFs I wanted that offered the drops I needed, did one Weekly, and the spare shards I picked up along the way filled the gaps.

 

The argument that HC has trivialized the journey to being incarnate carries no weight with me in particular. So back to the quoted point: the is no meaning to the time invested in the grind because there practically wasn't any of that, even. And once you're there, you're there.

Oh, and by the way? Rebirth doesn't have attuned IOs, either. If you think the Alpha shift is the power creep culprit, I'd like to introduce you to Blasters who solo Citadel TF in under an hour.

 

Spoiler

Which I love, and why I mostly play here.

 

[Draeth Darkstar]

7 hours ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

Despite it being called Hard Mode (the final name may yet change, but for discussion purposes that's where it's at right now) the focus was on active player engagement, universal role value (tank/damage/support/control), and feeling like you're contributing to the victory of your team no matter what you're playing.

The goal wasn't to be brutal or punishing, but to bring back meaning to roles that currently had little/no value or purpose in the current difficulty endgame such as support and control. Playing a control or support AT will feel very rewarding again in Hard Mode.

It does this organically as well, nothing silly like hard-requirements such as enemies that can only be held, etc... Enemies being held is desirable because they aren't hurting your team when held. We really tried to hone in on the basic core system designs for City of Heroes as a whole with our design approaches.

 

I hope that you're including Masterminds in this mindset, because the way Henchman work, they're already functionally useless (except as sad, terrible Defenders with weak powers and high endurance costs) in the current endgame content due to the fragility of pets and the way they interact with level scaling.

 

Any new endgame systems that make content more threatening to bad play without a serious modernization of how Mastermind pets interact with that content is going to be even more damning of the most unique but ultimately weak archetype in the game.

[Excraft]

7 hours ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

Hard mode enemies will have higher baselines stats, but nothing unfair and no absolutes. Nothing like big special damage types or auto-hits.

That being said, in a state of the game where a Defender can soft cap S/L/E defense with four power choices and minimal slotting investment, a new baseline was needed so that enemies can actually threaten players and was a requirement, but there is some new nuance and specifics regarding that, it will make more sense when the content is available on Brainstorm.

Keep in mind that enemies that cannot in any meaningful way threaten a team of players means control and support roles have absolutely no value. Enemies will be dangerous again, but playing poorly is the real killer. In testing the primary culprit of most deaths was the team splitting and aggroing too many mobs at once.

 

I'll reserve my judgement until this is on BETA and can be thoroughly tested.  We've been burned badly before with promises of one thing that gets replaced with another thing that isn't at all desirable or welcomed.  This sounds interesting, however I'm extremely cautious of the implementation.  What you all define as "unfair" or "playing poorly" can be very different than what others consider it to be.  I'm leery this is going to try and corral people into a specific, scripted style of play with specific team makeup to handle encounters.  That isn't fun and it's what WoW is for.  Also, parroting that support and control has no value at higher levels I think is an over exaggeration and always has been. 

 

I see a lot of bickering about setting TFs to hard mode or not coming with this.

[Cobalt Arachne]

22 minutes ago, Draeth Darkstar said:

Masterminds

There's stuff in the works. The player powers devs (of which I am not one) have some Mastermind AT adjustments in the shop; There were some planned for Page 3 but unfortunately ran into some wider system issues that need to be addressed before they can proceed and so had to be pushed back.

[Excraft]

3 hours ago, Wavicle said:

Yes, that's true. However, it is very difficult to balance the game when team members relative levels vary by so much. The sidekicking/mentoring system works pretty well when it restricts everybody to within 1 level of the mission owner. Adding the +levels really throws things out of whack.

 

Exemplared 50s with full sets of IOs or even SOs really are always going to outperform lower level characters using minimal slots and lower tier enhancements.  Same thing goes for a sidekicked lower level character.  There's actually quite a big gap there.