Nerf Level Shifts

[arcane]

1 minute ago, golstat2003 said:

 

Actually the +0 teams if they stay at +0 will never see the hard mode. So they won't think anything as the game will continue to be the same for them.

And thank god. Allowing there to be a +0 hard mode would be stupid.

 

+0 is called easy mode, and a +0 hard mode would just be an easy mode farm of supposedly hard mode rewards.

Edited October 8, 2021 by arcane

[golstat2003]

Just now, arcane said:

And thank god. Allowing there to be a +0 hard mode would be pretty stupid.

 

And I would be screaming bloody murder if they did. The base game should stay the SAME for those who want to play the base game. Full stop period.

[ZacKing]

10 minutes ago, arcane said:

I have no problem with them being allowed to try.

 

But if the content is easy enough for them to complete, at least without utterly obscene delays, then that content is not genuinely hard enough for this to be a worthwhile development. That’s the mode we already have. That’s not a new thing at all.

 

Fortunately Cobalt’s posts indicate they likely already agree with me on these issues.

 

Did you read what I wrote?  I said if they want to team wipe on every mob over and over again, let them.  If that's happening, pretty sure it's going to take that team a great long while to finish whatever they're running.  Guaranteed there will be all whatever AT teams that will be completing hard mode content for the bragging rights, even if it takes them hours and hours to finish.

[arcane]

Just now, ZacKing said:

 

Did you read what I wrote?  I said if they want to team wipe on every mob over and over again, let them.  If that's happening, pretty sure it's going to take that team a great long while to finish whatever they're running.  Guaranteed there will be all whatever AT teams that will be completing hard mode content for the bragging rights, even if it takes them hours and hours to finish.

Yes I read what you said. I was clarifying my position and we are clearly not that far apart here so cool your jets 🙂

[Bionic_Flea]

4 minutes ago, golstat2003 said:

Actually the +0 teams if they stay at +0 will never see the hard mode. So they won't think anything as the game will continue to be the same for them.

 

+0 Council are not the same as +0 Carnies, Malta, Arachnos, Vanguard, etc.  Some ATs and powersets perform better or worse against some of those, everyone stomps on Council.  I have a feeling the new stuff will be harder than Council at +0.

[ZacKing]

5 minutes ago, arcane said:

Yes I read what you said. I was clarifying my position and we are clearly not that far apart here so cool your jets 🙂

 

Not one of your kids buddy   I was just asking a question.

[golstat2003]

6 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:

 

+0 Council are not the same as +0 Carnies, Malta, Arachnos, Vanguard, etc.  Some ATs and powersets perform better or worse against some of those, everyone stomps on Council.  I have a feeling the new stuff will be harder than Council at +0.

 

You won't see hard mode if you run at +0 is my point.

 

For anyone running at +0 all the time hard mode pretty much deosn't exist, no matter the mob type.

 

I think folks will just have to experience it for themselves to understand.

Edited October 8, 2021 by golstat2003

[golstat2003]

Also in general I was really glad to see that the devs are thinking about adding new difficulty OPTIONS instead of taking things away from folks. 

Which is what I had been advocating for, for months when "difficulty" topics come up.

[Apparition]

27 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:

 

+0 Council are not the same as +0 Carnies, Malta, Arachnos, Vanguard, etc.  Some ATs and powersets perform better or worse against some of those, everyone stomps on Council.  I have a feeling the new stuff will be harder than Council at +0.

 

I can only hope.  I cannot possibly think of anything more boring than +0 in general, let alone +0 Council.

[MoonSheep]

On 10/8/2021 at 1:52 PM, arcane said:

To two ideas above:

 

If 8 blasters can do a hard mode tf, then it isn’t actually hard mode.

 

If rewards don’t increase with difficulty, then it’s just another self gimp mode. We already have those and the devs shouldn’t waste their time on another. 

 

quoted for truth

 

people want an automatic “You Win!” button as soon as they log on thesedays. the game is far too easy and there’s often very loud opposition to anyone who suggests amending anything or trying something different to improve the game and retain/attract players

 

- it would be great to see meaningfully challenging content on the game

- additional rewards for TF challenges, e.g. enemies buffed

- new TFs which require classic trinity play for those who enjoy it

- new badges for challenging content, challenging settings etc

Edited October 22, 2021 by MoonSheep

[Excraft]

On 10/8/2021 at 8:52 AM, arcane said:

To two ideas above:

 

If 8 blasters can do a hard mode tf, then it isn’t actually hard mode.

 

If rewards don’t increase with difficulty, then it’s just another self gimp mode. We already have those and the devs shouldn’t waste their time on another. 

 

This is another thinly veiled attempt at incorrectly defining what is the "right way" to play and the "correct" team composition.  8 blasters being able to complete a TF on hard mode is not wrong and is highly dependent on the circumstances.  Did it take them far longer than it would have with a tank and support?  Did the team wipe repeatedly with every mob spawn?  Hard does not and should not mean impossible and people should not be prevented from playing like this if that's what they choose to do with their free time.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Excraft

[InvaderStych]

8 hours ago, MoonSheep said:

- new TFs which require classic trinity play for those who enjoy it

 

Nope, thank you.  For some of us nothing is more boring, sorry and no offense intended, but also not sorry. 

 

The beauty of this game is in its flexibility; I'm all for setting challenges and I routinely take my own characters to their various (and admittedly quite humble) breaking points on the regular. I'm looking forward to Hard Mode as much as anyone else.  Hell, I'm even hoping for greater diversity in team composition and tactics as a response, but the only way to "require classic trinity play" given the multitude of options available in this game would be to impose arbitrary/artificial mechanics that serve only to penalize player creativity.

 

Does it really matter if 8 top end blasters helmed by 8 hyper-experienced players on voice comms can complete a Hard Mode task at maximum difficulty?  That's what's called an outlier.  We're not balancing for outliers.  If there's an issue with blasters (open to that discussion as I was absolutely shocked the first time I read stats on sustain toggles) that's better left for another thread and probably not the metric we should be measuring by if we think that metric is broken.

 

What about 8 Corrs or 8 Defenders?  Is running 4 Controllers and 4 Dominators "classic trinity play" or should that team be penalized for non-conformity? Melee characters can be built with all sorts of lite controls, should those builds be penalized in Hard Mode because a team of 8 melee toons with durability/lite-control focused builds don't conform to some arbitrary "classic" form of game play? What if groups of people want to bust out their Soldiers and Widows to run a full on Arachnos assault on Hard Mode?  Where does that fit?

 

Make no mistake; I totally agree that cases of successful runs by the likes listed above (theme teams, super-teams, teams of less than 8, challenge teams, etc) should be the rarest of outliers in Hard Mode on Max, and that the "most accessible" path to victory should be one that encourages a much wider breadth ATs in any given team. But in no way shape manner or form should Hard Mode arbitrarily limit the creativity of players in developing builds and team compositions while approaching these new challenges.

 

Don't forget that we are all, effectively, outliers anyway.  Even with my ham-fisted, half-incompetent abilities and wacky, conceptual, and often sub-optimal builds I'm still not representative of "the average player" and I don't really think anyone else in this thread is either. 😉

 

🍻

Edited October 22, 2021 by InvaderStych

[MoonSheep]

6 minutes ago, InvaderStych said:

 

Nope, thank you.  For some of us nothing is more boring, sorry and no offense intended, but also not sorry. 

 

 

the proposal is a request for new TFs where the trinity has significant advantages, rather than a change to existing TFs as to not impact the existing style of play. anyone would be free to play them if they wanted to, however there would be mechanisms which favour cooperation / teamwork of different ATs

[Glacier Peak]

Average player; assumption: slots SOs or a combination of DOs, SOs, and IOs. Slotting reflects general understanding of damage, accuracy, endurance, etc., enhancements based on Tutorial or from trial and error. Not optimized in any way. Power choices are defined by the action they observe when activating said power, not on synergies. New players views shaped heavily by teaming in the beginning stages of the game and it's content. 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by Glacier Peak

[Bionic_Flea]

8 hours ago, MoonSheep said:

new TFs which require classic trinity play for those who enjoy it

Agree with most of your post except for the word "require".  If they want to promote, incentivize, or reward having a taunt/DPS/control/buff-debuff set up that's fine.  You could fill those roles with lots of different team make-ups as there is sufficient overlap in roles, depending on builds.  But requiring any AT or powerset would be a huge mistake in my opinion.

 

I also disagree that being able to complete "hard mode" content with 8 blasters automatically makes it not hard.  That entirely depends on the content and the blasters.  If 8 random, badly SO-only slotted new players are able to do it is not the same as 8 knowledgeable veterans with bleeding edge builds doing it . . . and perhaps having a harder time doing it than if they had some support, meat shield, crowd control assistance.

[InvaderStych]

24 minutes ago, MoonSheep said:

the proposal is a request for new TFs where the trinity has significant advantages, rather than a change to existing TFs as to not impact the existing style of play. anyone would be free to play them if they wanted to, however there would be mechanisms which favour cooperation / teamwork of different ATs

 

Thank you for clarification; however I understand that it is "new content" under discussion and I have highlighted the portions of the clarification which are counter to the phrase "require classic trinity game play." I emphasized the one I feel is more important.

 

"Has significant advantages" =/= "Require."

 

"Cooperation/Team-Work of Different ATs" =/= "Classic Trinity Game Play"

 

No one is stopping anyone from creating "Classic Trinity Teams" to their heart's content.  But that is far from the only way to cooperate or to mix ATs and employ team-work.

 

I'm with The Flea on this one - quite in agreement with you in essence, but "requiring classic trinity game play" is a hard no for me.  It sounds, however, as though your intent is not a literal application of that phrase.

 

🍻

Edited October 22, 2021 by InvaderStych

[MoonSheep]

4 minutes ago, InvaderStych said:

 

Thank you for clarification; however I understand that it is "new content" under discussion and I have highlighted the portions of the clarification which are counter to the phrase "require classic trinity game play." I emphasized the one I feel is more important.

 

"Has significant advantages" =/= "Require."

 

"Cooperation/Team-Work of Different ATs" =/= "Classic Trinity Game Play"

 

No one is stopping anyone from creating "Classic Trinity Teams" to their heart's content.  But that is far from the only way to cooperate or to mix ATs and employ team-work.

 

I'm with The Flea on this one - quite in agreement with you in essence, but "requiring classic trinity game play" is a hard no for me.  It sounds, however, as though your intent is not a literal application of that phrase.

 

🍻

 

i haven’t got any fully fleshed out ideas, but perhaps TFs with mechanics that periodically deal unresistable damage or have the team start at 1hp each mission due to the storyline lore would encourage more AT-diverse teams

 

for me and many players, the sub lvl 30 game is the most enjoyable as teams benefit from the different attributes each AT brings to the mix

[Excraft]

On 10/22/2021 at 2:12 AM, MoonSheep said:

the game is far too easy and there’s often very loud opposition to anyone who suggests amending anything or trying something different to improve the game and retain/attract players

 

A game that launched 17 years ago using outdated code is going to have a very, very hard time attracting new players.  I'm sure there will be a few to check it out here and there, but in my opinion it's never going to draw in any large crowds.  There's way too much competition now.

 

On 10/22/2021 at 2:12 AM, MoonSheep said:

new TFs which require classic trinity play for those who enjoy it

 

No thank you.  You can already create your classic trinity teams and run whatever content you like.  This is yet another thinly veiled attempt to incorrectly define the "right way" to play and the "correct" team composition. 

 

From what I've read, it sounds like the Homecoming people here are approaching this hard mode the correct way.  "Proper" team makeup may be encouraged, but in no way mandatory.  I'll reserve judgement for when it's on BETA as we have been burned before with changes that sounded good, but turned out to be real steaming piles.

[MoonSheep]

15 minutes ago, Excraft said:

 

A game that launched 17 years ago using outdated code is going to have a very, very hard time attracting new players.  I'm sure there will be a few to check it out here and there, but in my opinion it's never going to draw in any large crowds.  There's way too much competition now.

 

 

No thank you.  You can already create your classic trinity teams and run whatever content you like.  This is yet another thinly veiled attempt to incorrectly define the "right way" to play and the "correct" team composition. 

 

From what I've read, it sounds like the Homecoming people here are approaching this hard mode the correct way.  "Proper" team makeup may be encouraged, but in no way mandatory.  I'll reserve judgement for when it's on BETA as we have been burned before with changes that sounded good, but turned out to be real steaming piles.

 

i’m not sure i’ve worded my post too well, the new ‘trinity’ TFs would be completely optional to play and would be added to the existing pool of TFs/trials rather than taking away or changing any content

 

anyone would be able to play them too, it would just have certain benefits to mixing up the team structure and playstyle a bit - inspired slightly by the challenges on L4D2

[InvaderStych]

22 hours ago, MoonSheep said:

i haven’t got any fully fleshed out ideas, but perhaps TFs with mechanics that periodically deal unresistable damage or have the team start at 1hp each mission due to the storyline lore would encourage more AT-diverse teams

 

You have played through The Graveyard Shift then, yes?  (or it's Redside counter-part) Running that in-level is quite fun and can be challenging.  Even more so before the Zoombies were tuned down from the original version.  There is a mission in there with some constant map-wide effects, good times. I do fully support this sort of thing but I also, in my usual, needlessly verbose manner, have some thoughts:

 

Keyes Island is easily the least popular iTrial, in part because of periodic irresistible damage and that damn disintegration beam that absolutely will kill you without some form of massive burst healing in the moment. Though it is also one that requires quite a bit of organization in order to complete, much less badge - so that has an impact as well. I think the thing on this trial people dislike most though is the Time Stop thing.  No one likes to be forced into moments of complete powerlessness. In the 19 months since I found HC I think I've seen a Keyes run in LFG once, maybe twice. 

 

But there are still many ways to approach these problems: during Live I had a /Regen brute that I made specifically for Keyes' irresistible damage tricks.  Because I was kind of personally irritated in the way that iTrials and other content felt "punishing" to melee characters in the moment.  I am not making an assertion that was the intent, but I am saying that when mechanics are introduced that are unavoidable, map wide, or "area denial via immediate death" that can make for some "frustrating feels" if they are not handled carefully in their implementation.

 

Did it work? Mostly. For those unfamiliar, Keyes' Green Stuff makes Battle Maiden's "Blue Death Patches" feel like a nice soak in the hot tub after a lovely day of skiing by comparison. Did I still have a button to call out "HELP!! DISINTEGRATING!!" ... ? You can bet your bippy I did, because even with the massive HP bucket and Regen Clicks he still needed outside heals to avoid dying and giving AM a big fat heal. I cannot remember if Regen was given to Brutes before or after Keyes was nerfed though, but I do remember how very difficult the original version was. 

 

So it's a fine line to walk, and I'd submit that the recently released arcs (referenced above) demonstrate that the HC team has a decent grasp on that.

 

22 hours ago, MoonSheep said:

for me and many players, the sub lvl 30 game is the most enjoyable as teams benefit from the different attributes each AT brings to the mix

 

Cool. Game your Game, Player.  There isn't really any one set of levels in this game that I find more enjoyable than another.  For me it's the journey of the toon; I rarely take something all the way to the end, but when I do I put a lot of time and effort into how I want it to play when I get there.  And I definitely want there to be big, crazy, toon-breaking, soul-crushing, OMG I CANT BELIEVE WE WON challenges waiting for me when I do.

 

And some of the same on the leveling journey along the way is fine with me too.

 

57 minutes ago, MoonSheep said:

i’m not sure i’ve worded my post too well, the new ‘trinity’ TFs

 

It's because of the word "Trinity."  It just doesn't apply in The Cities.  First because "Classic Trinity" makes me think (and others I would expect) "Damage, Tank, Heal" which completely discounts two huge parts of this game, Buff/De-Buff and Control.  As "tank" can be considered a form of Control (directing the flow of the opponent's damage is a form of control), what we have in this game is a Quad:

 

Control, Buff/De-Buff, Damage, Heal.

 

I suppose since I have been reductionist with Tanking I could argue against myself and reduce "Heal" into "Buff/De-buff" and we're back down to three.  But when someone uses the phrase "Classic Trinity" that's not comes to people's mind.  I'll leave out what comes to my mind, because it would seem antagonistic, and I don't really want mess up the thread.  More, lol.  The point is that without being reductionist we have this:

 

Control, Buff/De-Buff, Damage, Tank, Heal.

 

Reductionist Version:

 

Control, Buff/De-Buff, Damage.

 

I suppose that is a whole lot of semantic nonsense, but either categorization gives way to reason #2 that the phase "trinity team" doesn't apply here:

 

Those tools can be brought to bear by wildly different types of teams.  You don't need a "Tanker" to tank - see Ill/Rad and Dark/Rad controllers, see Brutes built for survival.  You don't need a "Defender" to have heals. Etc, etc, etc ...

 

More to the point, characters here can bring combinations of those tools.  Damage toons can carry soft controls, Control toons can Heal.  This game is just too flexible for the term "Trinity" as it typically applies in MMOs where uniformity and extreme character specialization are the norm. What we are looking for here is "Diverse Teams" not "Trinity Teams."  I know it's a silly, largely semantic thing.  But "trinity" is sort of a dirty word around here.

 

🍻

Edited October 23, 2021 by InvaderStych

[Doomguide2005]

     @InvaderStych

     I'd go a step further even and say we want Diverse Teams in the sense of over multiple team compositions and not necessarily within the composition of an individual team.  Everything from 8 Empaths or FRads to 8 entirely different ATs with everything in between included, all viable, even if each composition has varying degrees of success.

[Excraft]

5 hours ago, MoonSheep said:

i’m not sure i’ve worded my post too well, the new ‘trinity’ TFs would be completely optional to play and would be added to the existing pool of TFs/trials rather than taking away or changing any content

 

anyone would be able to play them too, it would just have certain benefits to mixing up the team structure and playstyle a bit - inspired slightly by the challenges on L4D2

 

You can already create your perfect trinity team for any existing content in the game with the extra benefit of playing on a well balanced group. 

[Bill Z Bubba]

On 10/5/2021 at 7:15 PM, Tsuko said:

Nerfing is like violence, it is the best proof of incompetence.

 

Partially correct. Nerfing is what happens when something is initially designed incompetently and needs to be corrected for balance.

 

I look forward to the new hard mode stuff but I don't see that it has anything to do with the OP.

 

Being able to steamroll through DA repeatables fighting essentially +1s for +4 rewards remains silly AF. Hard mode options in various TFs won't correct that incompetently designed mechanic. Even alpha functioning everywhere was a mistake from the get go.

 

On 10/5/2021 at 7:26 PM, Tsuko said:

This is Homecoming.

Let's move on.

 

Moving on is no reason to leave broken garbage broken.

[Force Redux]

You can take my alpha shift out of my mastermind's cold dead hands. Unless my pets get a level boost another way.

[Wavicle]

51 minutes ago, Force Redux said:

Unless my pets get a level boost another way.

Let us hope.