PvP suggestions (Civil feedback only please)

[arcane]

Who here hasn’t PvP’d much in 14 years? I can’t identify the culprit from quickly skimming the thread. But I might have missed a tiny sentence tucked away somewhere.

Guessing it’s just attitude, which is sad since that attitude, with some help from i13, has yielded the tiniest and most dysfunctional PvP community most here can fathom. 
 

Imagine if PvP’ers dropped their attitude about how amazing the current state of their community is and, instead of wrongly assuming everyone else just hasn’t put the time in in the last few years (ignorance or a lie), actually listened to the 99.9% they’ve alienated the hell out of.

Edited April 15, 2022 by arcane

[battlewraith]

Imagine if individuals didn't go off on bitter rants about a game community because some offhand comment rankled them. It's easy if you try.

 

 

[Marbing]

13 hours ago, arcane said:

Who here hasn’t PvP’d much in 14 years? I can’t identify the culprit from quickly skimming the thread.

I agree the comment was unnecessary and presumptuous.

 

Regardless, it seems this thread is starting to go the same way all threads about PvP go (or any polarizing thread). So unless you have an actual idea to contribute or can offer any insight in a respectful manner, please keep it to yourself. I get that people have bad days and feathers get ruffled. If you find yourself about to be a douche, walk away and come back once you have calmed down. This goes for everyone, including me as I am not perfect.
 

It’s just a game, idk why people get so worked up about it. Everyone has different levels of experience and at one point every single one of us were noobs. If someone says something that is incorrect, simply correct them in a polite manner. The same thing you would expect! Let’s keep this civil and respect one another’s point of view without the insults. 

That said, I get some of the points people are making. I don’t think it’s too difficult to find a middle ground for Mez. I suppose it could be a tad stronger on Controllers/Dominators, (i know not all mez is on the same lockout timer) but I understand that it’s a delicate balance. Because dominators used to… well dominate.  They could lock you down and kill you quick. Controllers on the other hand definitely struggled to quickly take down a target they had mezzed. Dominators can still be good in PvP in their current state but controllers really only help in a support capacity for team PvP. (Not entirely useless) Which may be okay, they are a support class. But, if we make mez too much better then it will help Doms a hell of a lot more than controllers. Again, IMO.
 

Also, I still like the idea of PvP zone alerts (maybe using Jade Spider like I believe @Rudra suggested) with big rewards to pull people into the zones. Maybe I am in the minority in this regard, and that’s okay. I get that this is just theory crafting, but I think it’s fun to brainstorm these things.
 

The ultimate goal here is to inspire more involvement in PvP. Being toxic to one another is counter that goal. Please be civil.

[battlewraith]

IMO there is no way that they will ever balance pvp in a manner that will cause a resurgence of interest along the lines of what people here are hoping for. That ship has sailed. Partly that is also due to age--there are veteran players around that will quickly figure out what the new meta is and make that meta necessary to be competitive. If your pvp has a competitive deathmatch mode and no real ranking or matchmaking system then beginners are going to face a harsh learning curve. Look at something like mez duration. If they make it long enough for an average player to solo someone in an extended battle, that same duration is going to make it ridiculously easy for a skilled team to burn down targets. 

 

This game doesn't need a balancing of the current pvp. It needs a new pvp mode. Something that is objective driven rather than rewarding raw kill counts. It could feature a lot of pve elements that make use of different things like mezzes, debuffs, etc. I think this has always been brought up in discussions about pvp from the beginning but never seems to get any traction. Maybe because back in the golden age when nobody had a clue what they were doing, pvp was reasonably successful. 

 

Of course someone is going to pop in here and say "I don't like pvp and I don't want the devs to waste precious time catering to the 10 remaining people that pvp blah blah blah."

My rebuttal to that is this: This is it. This ancient game is not going to through some sort of rebirth. It doesn't matter if NCSoft transfers the rights or someone buys a Superbowl ad. The extant target audience for it is here. And you're not going to keep their interest by keeping new content trickling in. Their interest is waning (or they are simply dieing off). It's turning into an online retirement home where every so often someone comes in and puts a new VHS tape in the VCR. I think you could put a more appealing pvp mode in that would be enjoyable for pvers and that would improve the overall health of the game.

[Rudra]

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

Of course someone is going to pop in here and say "I don't like pvp and I don't want the devs to waste precious time catering to the 10 remaining people that pvp blah blah blah."

I don't like PvP and would rather the devs spent their time elsewhere. There. Said it. (Edit again: Just because someone pops onto a thread and says they don't want it to exist doesn't invalidate the thread. It just means that person or persons are not being particularly helpful on the thread. They need to at least say why they oppose something, and the reason needs to be rational.)

 

I don't think I need to re-iterate my feelings on PvP for the umpteenth and a half time. However, PvP'ers are also CoX players and do need consideration too. So if something can be implemented that makes PvP more fun and gets more people to do it? Good for you, I'll do my best to help you come up with whatever it is.

 

If something can be implemented that somehow makes people like me willing to do PvP? Consider me suitably flabbergasted and ready to adore the ground you walk on. (Edit: Seriously. I just might go find where you live and steal some of your lawn or sidewalk to worship.)

 

The problem with PvP is also what is good about PvP. The people. In PvP, you have to face an opponent that knows not to just run into your tar patch or bonfire. You can't rely on AI stupidity to get you by. And lets face it, there is a LOT of AI stupidity helping players like me get by. Actively thinking about how to use your powers is good and can be rather fun. Dealing with the people is also the problem. I don't have mobs standing over me emoting things like 'teabags <character name>' when I lose in PvE. And that is just to keep the example civil. So if you want to expand the PvP base by roping in PvE'ers? I really don't see it happening. I wish you the best of luck, but I just don't see it happening.

 

While adding PvE content like a Jade Spider event or anything else in that line may work to get PvE'ers in there once or twice, you will quickly see them either trying to catch the event when they think there won't be PvP'ers or simply stop going. Like the Praetorian events. Those are mostly abandoned. They are good events! Doesn't stop them from being ignored.

 

I will give you any feedback and ideas I can when it comes to adding PvP content or making PvP seem a little more enticing to PvE'ers if you want. However, it will be done so with the awareness that it is not likely to accomplish the stated goal. And not because the requested content is bad, but because the PvP-PvE divide has become so deeply ingrained in so many people that it is less an uphill battle and more like trying to rope the sun with a daisy bracelet. Especially with the dichotomy of how powers work between the two.

 

Sorry for this comment derailing the purpose of this thread.

Edited April 16, 2022 by Rudra

[UltraAlt]

56 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

Something that is objective driven

 

Like

https://hcwiki.cityofheroes.dev/wiki/Recluse's_Victory

Recluse's Victory :: Zone Event

The zone of Recluse's Victory presents an alternative dimension in a constant state of flux. It pits the Good against Evil for control of a potential future for Primal Earth. This future is determined by the capture and control of various Temporal Anchors, each defended by a Pillbox. Each Pillbox that is captured will dramatically alter the surounding zone, changing the landscape to reflect the underlying ideals of those in charge - desolate and broken if controlled by Villains, humdrum if neutral and clean and bouyant if controlled by Heroes. This has no effect on spawning enemies (so for example, if the main Hero base portal is in villain territory, the Longbow NPC's will still be there, only the background changes).

Pillboxes have 4 turrets located at each of the crosshaped corners that start out as Level 54 Pop Up Anti-Personnel Guns. This is a good place to use Heavies, especially when soloing since you will have a tough time securing the Pillbox. Once all 4 Pop Up Turrets are defeated, the player can head to the center of the Pillbox and activate the control panel. Once the capture process (which can be interrupted) is successfully completed, the four corners of the Pillbox convert to 2 different sets of 2 missile Turrets at level 50. Players can stand in the middle and, just like capturing a pill box, activate the controls. This allows them to focus a pill box's firepower at a particular enemy by commanding with a Mastermind's controls. This is useful, since players (while in the center) get extra protection, and can use their powers to defend the pillbox as well as the turrets.

When either side controls their fourth pillbox, reinforcements spawn to support the other faction in the form of two to three Signature Heroes/Villains. At the fifth pillbox another wave of support is spawned if the first set of Signature Heroes/Villains has already been defeated.

At the capture of the sixth pillboxes for a side, the zone is "won" by that side, and a five minute counter begins. After the five minutes (or shorter: see below), all characters get the message "Dimensional Reversion" and the pillboxes revert to neutral status. All neutral pop-up turrets then respawn on all pillboxes. During the five minutes, the winning side can continue to defeat enemy heroes/villains for bonus credit towards their side's Heavy. In the five minute timer, the losing side can defeat opposing heroes/villains to cause an early Dimensional Reversion.

 

- or -

 

https://hcwiki.cityofheroes.dev/wiki/Siren's_Call

Siren's Call : Zone Events

Bounty! Hunt down player enemies and get spendable points for it. The zone will "paint" your assigned target's rough location on the map every so often with a temporary waypoint.

Battle for Siren's Call - Battles between armies of Arachnos and Longbow NPCs at local hotspots determine which faction controls Siren's Call. Control gives a faction access to one or two sets of temporary powers.

 

- or -

 

https://hcwiki.cityofheroes.dev/wiki/Warburg

Warbug : Zone Events

https://hcwiki.cityofheroes.dev/wiki/Missile_Launch_Mission

 

+

Lots of badges in every zone.

 

+

I think there are PVE missions in all PVP areas, and there are definitely PVE enemies to fight in the open worlds of all PVP areas.

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

I think you could put a more appealing pvp mode in that would be enjoyable for pvers and that would improve the overall health of the game.

 

And I think the DEV time could be better spent on areas of the game that the DEVs feel good/excited about whatever time they have to put into the game.

If that ends up being PVP that's great for the very small number of PVP players. I don't think that will help to rejuvenate the game.

 

Making posts about the game being a retirement home isn't going to help the game either.

[Troo]

17 hours ago, MJB said:

you can access the arena from anywhere (including pvp zones) to do impromptu 1v1s using the menu

 

have always used the terminals. thanks for this.

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, UltraAlt said:

 

Like

 

No not like any of those, which are all zone events, suffer from numerical balance issues and were fairly long and boring even back on live.

1 hour ago, UltraAlt said:

Making posts about the game being a retirement home isn't going to help the game either.

Who knows, maybe it will resonate with someone who actually wants to avoid that kind of outcome.

[Greycat]

On 4/13/2022 at 5:07 PM, Marbing said:

A) Open up more builds/ATs to being relatively competitive. 
B) Give incentive enough to PvP that makes it worth the investment. Idc what the incentive is, more fun things to do, more merits, whatevs… just some examples and it doesn’t have to be those.

 

Yeah, preferred pre-13 zone PVP myself.

 

Part of the question that comes up when someone wants ATs or builds in PVP to be "competitive" is - "what do you mean?" Should anyone be able to 1v1 anyone else? That's pretty much not going to happen - COH doesn't have a "fighter," "dps," "rogue," "healer" basic class setup, it's got ATs which can vary wildly within themselves, which makes that balance very difficult. Always has.

 

My answer for some time on live about how "x is unfair/unbalanced" was, often, "bring a team," because while I'd had some fun 1v1 fights (or, honestly, 1vmany,) a team that worked well together - even pickup - could really shine. (Yes, held Siren's Call with a team of 3 for quite some time once, 'til we were overwhelmed by numbers. It was a *blast.*)

 

Now, that's not to say things shouldn't be adjusted, but ... POV helps with these. And it seems everyone wants something different. 1v1 is always going to favor certian builds - my earth/FF troller isn't going to do anything, for instance, and I'd *never* expect it to find or be given any sort of "balance" to be competitive.  Even in PVE, enemies tend to die of old age rather than damage. 🙂

 

Incentive-wise... I don't know about arena, but zone varies zone by zone. BB I think is ... fine, really, with its main issue being the level range and what that can bring (a new level 15 vs someone exemped down to 25 with up to level 30 powers... that can be rough.) Same with RV, it's pretty good. Warburg's ... mostly hobbled by stupid AIs being unable to follow or path up ramps properly and their issues with stealth. The big outlier is, of course, Siren's - bounty doesn't persist, even if you go into zone missions, it takes too long to accumulate and what you can buy with it isn't worth it (woo, an SO at ... what, 6000?) The zone battles are slow and uninteresting and take too long to get started or ... really do anything. Of all the zones that need a look over for reward, and events (I'm "eh" on the jade spider, personally) Siren's needs it... even if we were looking at it from a strictly PVE POV.

[Marbing]

1 hour ago, Greycat said:

Part of the question that comes up when someone wants ATs or builds in PVP to be "competitive" is - "what do you mean?" Should anyone be able to 1v1 anyone else?

No, I wouldn’t think it’s possible to ever reach anyone can 1v1 anyone and be on equal ground, there will always be a meta that gets abused. I was just pointing out any change that opens the door for more AT relevance would be a welcome one, not that such change would or could happen or that it would lead to everyone being on equal ground in 1v1. 

 

1 hour ago, Greycat said:

Incentive-wise... I don't know about arena, but zone varies zone by zone. BB I think is ... fine, really, with its main issue being the level range and what that can bring (a new level 15 vs someone exemped down to 25 with up to level 30 powers... that can be rough.) Same with RV, it's pretty good. Warburg's ... mostly hobbled by stupid AIs being unable to follow or path up ramps properly and their issues with stealth. The big outlier is, of course, Siren's - bounty doesn't persist, even if you go into zone missions, it takes too long to accumulate and what you can buy with it isn't worth it (woo, an SO at ... what, 6000?) The zone battles are slow and uninteresting and take too long to get started or ... really do anything. Of all the zones that need a look over for reward, and events (I'm "eh" on the jade spider, personally) Siren's needs it... even if we were looking at it from a strictly PVE POV.

I know there are current zone events and things to do. My idea around this was more to introduce something bigger. Something that is ACTUALLY a good reward for the PvP risk. I think that could go a long way. Simply participating in what’s there is, as multiple people have said now, very meh. So I am not talking about adding more meh, I would like to see something “wow”. Idk what that would look like but it would be cool and I think would increase the draw.

[golstat2003]

16 hours ago, Marbing said:

No, I wouldn’t think it’s possible to ever reach anyone can 1v1 anyone and be on equal ground, there will always be a meta that gets abused. I was just pointing out any change that opens the door for more AT relevance would be a welcome one, not that such change would or could happen or that it would lead to everyone being on equal ground in 1v1. 

 

I know there are current zone events and things to do. My idea around this was more to introduce something bigger. Something that is ACTUALLY a good reward for the PvP risk. I think that could go a long way. Simply participating in what’s there is, as multiple people have said now, very meh. So I am not talking about adding more meh, I would like to see something “wow”. Idk what that would look like but it would be cool and I think would increase the draw.

i don’t really think you should focus on increasing the draw as I don’t think anything but a complete revamp will do that. I would suggest they keep focusing on improving it for those who do like and participate in pvp.

[Marbing]

4 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

i don’t really think you should focus on increasing the draw as I don’t think anything but a complete revamp will do that. I would suggest they keep focusing on improving it for those who do like and participate in pvp.

Well I think increasing the participation is improving it for those who already like it. I’ve seen several PvPers leave or stop playing because of participation alone. So, if you can find a way to increase participation without ruining the gameplay then those who already like it will probably like it more. If you put more rewards into the system, you will increase the incentive and thus the participation. That’s the theory anyways.

[Glacier Peak]

Since we are talking about PvP changes/suggestions - I made a PvE-related suggestion for a PvP-specific change in this thread:

 

[FDR's Think Tank]

Every time I think about CoH PvP and the issues about why it is so complex to balance, I find myself thinking a few things:

 

1.) This game does Cooperative MMO incredibly well.

2.) PvP has always gotten worse in this game, they have no clear idea of how to make it fun.

3.) The game is built for PvE in an extreme way.

4.) PvP is a nonsensical game of Psychic Damage/Psychic Immunity, plus whatever the current Meta has become.

5.) The only way to have PvP work is for the game to be built from the ground up with it specifically in mind, letting Players and NPC's share the same system rather than building different systems for each.

 

 

You can skip the rest of this... this is just my in depth thoughts on the topic.

 

On the discussion of how to Balance PvP for a new game, I have many ideas... but for this one, I'm afraid nothing can make people happy. You just have to enjoy it as is. My best memories of the PvP in this game was always before they started to "Rebalance" it. Now the changes are so baked into the structure of the game, you would destroy the PvE balance if you made any of the changes necessary to fix this.

 

I actually think that the original designers of City of Heroes were closer to what MMO PvP needs than anyone else. We are talking when City of Heroes before it got Tankers, Defenders, Scrappers, Controllers, and Blasters as the Archetypes. The ORIGINAL concept Archetypes: Mutant, Altered Human, Magical Powers, Cyberware, Superior Human, Gadgeteer, and Mystical Artifacts. These Archetypes didn't factor in PvE playstyle at all, which meant two things: The creators would have needed to give the player the flexibility to build their character to fill the team role the player envisioned for the character and the powers had to be balanced with each other, rather than with the gameplay environment. This obviously proved to be too much to pull off. There is more to it than just blazing a trail, after all... you have to have a clear vision of how to support those dreams.

 

We all know the game was sold to a team who already had experience building MMO's the traditional way, with Levels, EXP punishment for death, and locked in player roles at character creation. While these elements can be balanced for PvP, I have never seen an MMO balance them in a way that doesn't require constant rebalancing. That's all fine and dandy when you have a subscription service and people are paying you to update the game constantly... there is plenty of room for what ultimately becomes Programming Malfeasance, no matter how unintentional. We need only look at the Peacebringer and Warshade situation for an example of what could and DID happen. Honestly, both should have gotten Power Proliferation and Archetype expansion. We could have gotten Malta Peacemakers with Tank Robot and Jet Flyer forms and Circle of Thorns Warlocks with their own demonic twisting's. I could even see Arachnos Soldiers and Widows becoming powerset choices in Soldier and Fatale Archetypes. I could easily see us getting Wyvern Fatales and Longbow Soldiers...

 

However, that was all under the premise that NCSoft had kept the game going and was willing to let programmers make it happen. We were all shocked when they shut the game down, which, while not doing gangbusters, was still profitable for them. The reasoning that "They wanted people to play their other games" doesn't fly either, since we know that most of us never played another NCSoft game again. I know I personally wrote off multiple franchises NCSoft had planned because of it. We have to ask ourselves at some point "What was NCSoft afraid of about this game?" I think it's somewhere in the programmers constantly telling people in the forums that there would never be new powersets for the Peacebringer or Warshade because, initially "They have everything they need" and then when that line got stale "We don't have anyone who understands how they were programmed in the first place". It's fine and dandy to say that to your playerbase, but you can't use either of those on your investors.

 

We are darn lucky to have people reverse engineering the game and making balance patches today... but I am more optimistic about Power Proliferation finally hitting Epic Archetypes than PvP being actually balanced in this game. And that's okay. It doesn't need to be balanced if it's fun. My favorite PvP game to this day was the throw away Multiplayer games Rare included with Conker's Bad Fur Day. They weren't balanced at all but they provided endless fun.

 

What is PvP balance? For fun? Or for Competition?

 

[macskull]

10 hours ago, FDR&#x27;s Think Tank said:

1.) This game does Cooperative MMO incredibly well.

2.) PvP has always gotten worse in this game, they have no clear idea of how to make it fun.

3.) The game is built for PvE in an extreme way.

4.) PvP is a nonsensical game of Psychic Damage/Psychic Immunity, plus whatever the current Meta has become.

5.) The only way to have PvP work is for the game to be built from the ground up with it specifically in mind, letting Players and NPC's share the same system rather than building different systems for each.

I'll address these parts of the post since the rest is too long to respond to:

1. Sure does.
2. This game's devs historically had a very bad track record of actually listening to PvPers to make improvements to the game. Hell, before I13 there was a pretty long list from the PvP community of desired fixes and suggestions, and they were almost universally ignored in favor of the I13 changes. The Homecoming team has been better about this, and I27 had some pretty hefty PvP improvements which were driven by player feedback but then much of that goodwill evaporated when the rooting/animation canceling changes happened.
3. What do you mean "in an extreme way?" It's not built for PvE any more than any other MMO is.
4. Damage type is largely irrelevant in PvP. Your point might have been kind of true prior to I13, but it hasn't been that way in 14 years.
5. The first part of your statement here isn't really true - the game was always going to have PvP, it just wasn't in at launch. I'll dig up the source for this when I've got more time, if you want. As for the second part, the I13 changes alienated a lot of people because the game just didn't play the same between PvE and PvP.

Finally, I want to address a separate comment I've heard over and over and over again: "more stuff needs to be viable" or "only a few builds are good in PvP" or anything along those lines. In a game with literally thousands of powerset combinations, you cannot make everything or even most things viable. You could potentially do something like LoL where there's significant rebalancing every so often to shake up the meta and keep things fresh, but that requires a ton of dev attention which won't happen here. What you find in CoH is the sets/ATs that are "good" vary by the type of PvP you're engaging in - different stuff is good in large team settings, small team settings, and anything-goes zone settings. For the most part, PvP favors sets which provide high single-target burst damage, so naturally the sets which are useful are going to be limited. It's the same reason I wouldn't bring an FF/AR Defender as a fire farmer - sure, I could make it work but it isn't going to be good at it.

[Marbing]

2 hours ago, macskull said:

For the most part, PvP favors sets which provide high single-target burst damage, so naturally the sets which are useful are going to be limited. It's the same reason I wouldn't bring an FF/AR Defender as a fire farmer - sure, I could make it work but it isn't going to be good at it.

I think this is an apt analogy given the limited number of ATs are viable in fire farming. I dont think it will ever be possible to make all ATs/sets viable at PvP. But it is possible to make MORE ATs/sets viable, which is a very important distinction when we are talking about change. I would never want the goal out of the gates to make EVERYTHING viable at EVERYTHING. ATs have different strengths and there is always going to be give/take with that. Especially in a game with literally thousands of different combinations.
 

 

So, again, any change that would increase the number of viable ATs/sets in PvP would be a positive change IMO, but I am not naive, I know it isn’t possible to make every combination viable. When it comes to the conversation about powerset viability I think we need to keep these things in mind. 
 

For example: What changes can be made (if any, and outside of crey pistol since it seems the devs are sold on that exploit being gone) to decrease the gap that exists between Melee and Ranged DPS in PvP?

[golstat2003]

2 hours ago, Marbing said:

I think this is an apt analogy given the limited number of ATs are viable in fire farming. I dont think it will ever be possible to make all ATs/sets viable at PvP. But it is possible to make MORE ATs/sets viable, which is a very important distinction when we are talking about change. I would never want the goal out of the gates to make EVERYTHING viable at EVERYTHING. ATs have different strengths and there is always going to be give/take with that. Especially in a game with literally thousands of different combinations.
 

 

So, again, any change that would increase the number of viable ATs/sets in PvP would be a positive change IMO, but I am not naive, I know it isn’t possible to make every combination viable. When it comes to the conversation about powerset viability I think we need to keep these things in mind. 
 

For example: What changes can be made (if any, and outside of crey pistol since it seems the devs are sold on that exploit being gone) to decrease the gap that exists between Melee and Ranged DPS in PvP?

 

I'll let the actual pvpers answer, but I think this right here is the wrong question to ask right out the gate. I don't think you can decrease that gap much as both just have different inherent makeup in how the powersets with those ATs (not to mention the ATs themselves) function.

 

Plus there are inherent things to being "melee" and being "ranged" in this game that can't be overly overlooked. Holds or stuns for instance could help Melee close the gap, but since holds don't actually hold in pvp as of i13, there you go. Also Melee has armor, Ranged doesn't usually, or at least not as much as Melee, unless they build for it. (Though with defense not actually being defense in pvp . . .)

 

Plus anything you do might not be looked upon favorable by either side of that divide. Also the devs did try to make things easier and more simplified based on how they felt they could "get more folks to pvp". And we know how that turned out.

 

There are so many variations in this game of what it means to be a "melee" and "ranged" that I'd be wary of any suggestion that starts with trying to answer "how do you close the gap between melee and ranged DPS", but willing to hear any wild ideas. 

Edited April 18, 2022 by golstat2003

[Marbing]

1 hour ago, golstat2003 said:

I'll let the actual pvpers answer, but I think this right here is the wrong question to ask right out the gate.

It was a sample question. Hence “For Example:” It was meant to be an example for what kind of discussion can be had. Not necessarily the only discussion that can be had. Yes, probably best to let the PvPers answer that question or any other questions about AT balance. 
 

1 hour ago, golstat2003 said:

(Though with defense not actually being defense in pvp . . .)

So… getting rid of DR could help close that gap? Seems a popular request, even among PvPers. Another suggestion could be, remove the inherent resistance that squishies get? Idk just spit balling here based on your objections to the sample question. I too would like to hear from someone with more experience in this area…

 

 

 

Edited April 18, 2022 by Marbing
Extra return removed

[macskull]

9 hours ago, Marbing said:

So, again, any change that would increase the number of viable ATs/sets in PvP would be a positive change IMO, but I am not naive, I know it isn’t possible to make every combination viable. When it comes to the conversation about powerset viability I think we need to keep these things in mind.

It all depends on how any such changes are handled and implemented. The stated intention of the I13 changes was to make PvP more accessible to the casual player (via a combination of raising the skill floor, lowering the skill ceiling, and ostensibly making more builds viable) but we all know how that turned out. It seems unlikely that any sweeping changes can be made to accomplish this goal without having negative effects on what makes PvP in this game great. (Yes, post-I13 PvP is still leagues better than what you'll find in many other MMOs from a pacing standpoint, which is mostly what drew people to it in the first place.) The community can probably suggest tweaks on a power or powerset basis to improve variety, but in all honestly the perceived lack of variety isn't a thing aside from the more-competitive 8v8 scene, and even then you get at least some variation in what any given team is running.

 

9 hours ago, Marbing said:

For example: What changes can be made (if any, and outside of crey pistol since it seems the devs are sold on that exploit being gone) to decrease the gap that exists between Melee and Ranged DPS in PvP?

I know this is an example, but I think this is offering a solution in search of a problem. Melee doesn't have much place in high-end 8v8 matches, but you see melee characters show up more often in small-team stuff and even more in zone - it wasn't uncommon a couple years back for over half the population in RV to be Scrappers, Tankers, and Stalkers. It gets really tricky trying to balance things when you have a single character able to effectively hold their own against a team of 4-6 people without any outside help: should that character also get Blaster-level damage?

 

5 hours ago, Marbing said:

So… getting rid of DR could help close that gap? Seems a popular request, even among PvPers. Another suggestion could be, remove the inherent resistance that squishies get? Idk just spit balling here based on your objections to the sample question. I too would like to hear from someone with more experience in this area…

I may catch some flak for this, but DR is a good thing. It's just very, very poorly implemented. DR means you can't buff someone's stats to astronomical numbers (anyone remember how hard it was for a character without Aim to hit a Blaster with two PB'd Fortitudes on them?) but for ranged ATs the curves for defense and resistance are so harsh support characters to provide them aren't needed. Pre-I13 you'd have a pair of Sonics on heroside teams (two Therms and a Sonic redside) but DR on resistance buffs means you can just drop those in favor of more damage.

 

Adjusting the DR curves instead of getting rid of them entirely is the better option and could make running a Therm or Sonic worthwhile again, but remember ally buffs are now AoE instead of single-target so the job of a Therm/Sonic in the current PvP meta would be very different than it was 15 years ago. Getting rid of base resistances might help but it's a bandaid on the problem.

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, macskull said:

I know this is an example, but I think this is offering a solution in search of a problem. Melee doesn't have much place in high-end 8v8 matches, but you see melee characters show up more often in small-team stuff and even more in zone - it wasn't uncommon a couple years back for over half the population in RV to be Scrappers, Tankers, and Stalkers. It gets really tricky trying to balance things when you have a single character able to effectively hold their own against a team of 4-6 people without any outside help: should that character also get Blaster-level damage?

 

 

Yeah, absolutely. If you get in melee range and land your hard hitting attack, it should hurt bad. Kinetic melee scrappers pre nerf were awesome. That should be the standard.

They should be able to hold their own (ie survive) against multiple opponents if played reasonably well. On the other hand, they shouldn't get as much benefit from being buffed on a team as squishies would. 

 

Melee characters are the best options for soloists wanting to try pvp. If they don't have a good level of survivability there's no point when you can play a blaster with epic shields and plant shields that can melt targets from a distance. It's also pointless if they can't reasonably drop targets when they do connect. 

[Glacier Peak]

3 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

 

Yeah, absolutely. If you get in melee range and land your hard hitting attack, it should hurt bad. Kinetic melee scrappers pre nerf were awesome. That should be the standard.

They should be able to hold their own (ie survive) against multiple opponents if played reasonably well. On the other hand, they shouldn't get as much benefit from being buffed on a team as squishies would. 

 

Melee characters are the best options for soloists wanting to try pvp. If they don't have a good level of survivability there's no point when you can play a blaster with epic shields and plant shields that can melt targets from a distance. It's also pointless if they can't reasonably drop targets when they do connect. 

I'd offer that team mates are an essential part in any PvP environment, short of perhaps fight clubbing. The more teammates you have, the higher your chances of defeating the opposition becomes. 

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, Glacier Peak said:

I'd offer that team mates are an essential part in any PvP environment, short of perhaps fight clubbing. The more teammates you have, the higher your chances of defeating the opposition becomes. 

Sure, but that's not how most people play in my experience at least in zone. You decide you want to go screw around in a zone. You take something you think is going to work reasonably well and pop in. Depending on the conditions, you team up with other people as needed. That's pretty much the entire appeal of zone pvp, it's casual unstructured fights. If there's an organized group in there farming people, then yeah you're going to need to form a team and actually put some thought into what you're playing. But you quickly reach the point where you would be better off doing arena.

[Marbing]

16 hours ago, macskull said:

It all depends on how any such changes are handled and implemented.

I agree.

 

16 hours ago, macskull said:

Adjusting the DR curves instead of getting rid of them entirely is the better option and could make running a Therm or Sonic worthwhile again, but remember ally buffs are now AoE instead of single-target so the job of a Therm/Sonic in the current PvP meta would be very different than it was 15 years ago. Getting rid of base resistances might help but it's a bandaid on the problem.

I was just being extreme to make a point, lol. I agree adjusting DR is better than getting rid of it entirely. Glad we see eye to eye here. Though I think removing base resistance would help more than some other suggestions.

 

16 hours ago, macskull said:

I know this is an example, but I think this is offering a solution in search of a problem.

So there exists no gap between ranged and melee in PvP? Good to know. I seem to keep hearing otherwise.

[macskull]

11 hours ago, Marbing said:

So there exists no gap between ranged and melee in PvP? Good to know. I seem to keep hearing otherwise.

My response to that question is basically "it's not that simple." In 8v8 stuff, melee is not particularly useful because of the specific timing required to defeat a target (attacks are coordinated, all damage comes in within a 2-to-3-second window, etc.) and because having to get into melee range to execute attacks is a dead giveaway which will make the target phase or jaunt away and ruin the spike. In smaller-team (think 3v3-type stuff) melee can be just fine since the concerns I described for large-team stuff aren't really there. In duels most melee characters can at worst force a draw by simply playing intelligently, and many times can beat ranged characters. In zone PvP it's a free for all and none of that really matters, but melee ATs are popular because they can shrug off huge amounts of damage while getting some decent attacks in occasionally.

 

It's a damage/survivability balance: melee ATs tend to be way more survivable when played well than any ranged AT, but dealing consistent damage with a melee AT is more difficult because of the game's pace. You can't really slow down that pace without slowing it down for everyone, and that takes away probably the most unique thing about CoH PvP.

[MJB]

I would go as far as to say melee AT's are overpowered and reducing the gap would mean nerfing melee across the board. they arent seen in 8v8 due to the ruleset (taunt ban) and because being able to tank 4 people at the same time doesnt matter when there are 8 people on the other team. in small team/zone with just a bit of practice with movement they are definitely strong. in 1v1 i would be willing to bet 2b+ inf i could beat any blaster with a few of my scrappers.

 

also melee is quite fun in small team stuff, for example:

 

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1022183669

 

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1032482146