Should aggro limits be rebalanced?

[Purple Spy]

Topic.

 

Personal opinion, it feels terrible. It feels jank. During completely normal gameplay mobs suddenly stop dead in their tracks like they have some case of hyper amnesia. Even 2 groups of mobs in an 8 man team (easy to get as you'll often have multiple groups packed tightly together in missions) is going to cause a number of the mobs to pick a new target. This is incredibly frustrating as someone who used to main tank, but also frustrating and baffling for new players. It's such an alien concept, i don't think I've seen it in any other game (at least nowhere near as low as the mob count in CoH) it looks like a bug, or like your tank sucks. And I've already had to explain it to so many new players, and the general response is almost always along the lines of "what? That's fucking stupid". And to be honest, I agree.

 

So I think the aggro limits should be re-evaluated. Theres already caps on AoE skills to prevent you from obliterating 50 mobs at a time, so increasing it a bit shouldnt completely shift the balance of the game. I'm not saying it should be removed, as that would bring us back to the days of chaining hundreds of mobs across an entire mission, but raising it to the 25-30 range, something that would be outside of what you would usually see in normal gameplay, seems reasonable to me.

[SwitchFade]

This has been discussed ad-nauseum in other threads.

 

The short version is -and I'm sure people who just want it changed because they want it will be here soon- that aggro cap and the cap on aoe mob Target cannot be increased simply.

 

There are a whole host of other factors to consider when changing these. Practically speaking, an increase of PERHAPS 2-4 individual foes is possible without any dramatic rebalancing, but beyond that, it would require significant work. And really, it's not maddening or frustrating, it just requires tactical application of game play.

 

So, unfortunately I vote no on this, as it would require significant time and resources to even begin testing. On live this spent years in balance, rebalance and testing, and that was with millions of dollars on hand and a large team that were receiving paychecks.

[jack_nomind]

Whole-heartedly agree that aggro limits, particularly for Tankers, should be upped by a factor of 2x to 3x.

 

This has been discussed ad-nauseum in other threads.

 

The short version is -and I'm sure people who just want it changed because they want it will be here soon- that aggro cap and the cap on aoe mob Target cannot be increased simply.

 

Eh... that's a position held just by some guy named SwitchFade, afaik.

 

So, unfortunately I vote no on this, as it would require significant time and resources to even begin testing. On live this spent years in balance, rebalance and testing, and that was with millions of dollars on hand and a large team that were receiving paychecks.

 

So did Devices.

[SwitchFade]

Whole-heartedly agree that aggro limits, particularly for Tankers, should be upped by a factor of 2x to 3x.

 

This has been discussed ad-nauseum in other threads.

 

The short version is -and I'm sure people who just want it changed because they want it will be here soon- that aggro cap and the cap on aoe mob Target cannot be increased simply.

 

Eh... that's a position held just by some guy named SwitchFade, afaik.

 

So, unfortunately I vote no on this, as it would require significant time and resources to even begin testing. On live this spent years in balance, rebalance and testing, and that was with millions of dollars on hand and a large team that were receiving paychecks.

 

So did Devices.

 

Please stop being patently disrespectful to others on the forum. I have already given evidence to clearly demonstrate reality, regardless of your desires. This is the third thread you enter with disrespectful sarcastic slight, with the only intent being to belittle.

 

In the future, I hope you will be able to respectfully post, and desist from condescension.

[drbuzzard]

 

The short version is -and I'm sure people who just want it changed because they want it will be here soon- that aggro cap and the cap on aoe mob Target cannot be increased simply.

 

There are a whole host of other factors to consider when changing these. Practically speaking, an increase of PERHAPS 2-4 individual foes is possible without any dramatic rebalancing, but beyond that, it would require significant work. And really, it's not maddening or frustrating, it just requires tactical application of game play.

 

So, unfortunately I vote no on this, as it would require significant time and resources to even begin testing. On live this spent years in balance, rebalance and testing, and that was with millions of dollars on hand and a large team that were receiving paychecks.

 

So basically you set up a straw man to argue against this suggestion. The initial suggestion does not (and in fact specifically says not to) propose increasing the AOE caps. It only proposes increasing the aggro cap. That is a completely different kettle of fish, and in terms of balance, really isn't that big a deal IMO.

 

Right now for aggro control and tanker can easily get exceeded, and thus you might need a second tank on a team, but only sometimes.

 

Now if you think that aggro control is a big balance issue, then argue that and don't bring up AOE target caps, as that is a completely separate issue.

 

Personally I think this suggestion would be a good thing for a couple of reasons. First off, as the OP says, sometimes you can't avoid getting a second group involved on a big team, and the tank then tries to grab extra aggro, but his current aggro targets then make his team start faceplanting. Increasing this number would make him much more capable of doing his job, which is simply to take a pounding for others.

 

The second reason is actually for those who aren't number crunchers and forum readers. There's still lots of people back to COH who have no idea there even is a aggro cap, and they do things which get teams killed because they are playing like in the early days of the game. You can easily get enemy attention without locking down aggro, and that causes a lot of needless debt when people engage thinking the tank has aggro.

 

To make a point as to why there's really no balance issue here, and as someone who used to herd maps into dumpsters for the nuking, it was the lack of AOE caps that make herding worth your while. As it is now with 14 at best as the AOE cap (outside of incarnate) herding is mostly just a waste of time. A team is more efficient running group to group and steamrolling.

[justicebeliever]

To the original poster - you can view all the existing drama on this exact question here -

 

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/index.php/topic,3407.0.html

 

If we can keep it to that thread it makes it easier to have the conversation....

[Solarverse]

To the original poster - you can view all the existing drama on this exact question here -

 

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/index.php/topic,3407.0.html

 

If we can keep it to that thread it makes it easier to have the conversation....

 

Agreed. I wanted to comment on this subject, but would rather keep it to the original thread that is still active. It's a pretty big debate...just be careful treading those waters...there be shark in there.  ;)

[Purple Spy]

Appologies. Looks like at the time of my posting this, the other thread had no discussion since the 10th. I scrolled back to the 2nd page of posts before i made this topic and didn't see anything, which is why i felt compelled to make this. I figured this had been discussed before but i didnt know you had a "megathread" so to speak.

 

Feel free to delete this thread if you feel it's unnecessary. But if it's been discussed to death and is still being discussed, then perhaps that at least warrants giving it a round on the test servers or an open community vote.

[jack_nomind]

(Meta/OT) The other discussion kind of fell apart; you aren't wrong that it was a bit buried, because I wasn't originally going to respond to the last comment in it (which was a response to me) and no one else was likely to, either.  I was... disappointed... to see the first post to this thread for that reason, and resurrected the old post in the hopes we could contain that specific bickering to there.

[SwitchFade]

 

The short version is -and I'm sure people who just want it changed because they want it will be here soon- that aggro cap and the cap on aoe mob Target cannot be increased simply.

 

There are a whole host of other factors to consider when changing these. Practically speaking, an increase of PERHAPS 2-4 individual foes is possible without any dramatic rebalancing, but beyond that, it would require significant work. And really, it's not maddening or frustrating, it just requires tactical application of game play.

 

So, unfortunately I vote no on this, as it would require significant time and resources to even begin testing. On live this spent years in balance, rebalance and testing, and that was with millions of dollars on hand and a large team that were receiving paychecks.

 

So basically you set up a straw man to argue against this suggestion. The initial suggestion does not (and in fact specifically says not to) propose increasing the AOE caps. It only proposes increasing the aggro cap. That is a completely different kettle of fish, and in terms of balance, really isn't that big a deal IMO.

 

Right now for aggro control and tanker can easily get exceeded, and thus you might need a second tank on a team, but only sometimes.

 

Now if you think that aggro control is a big balance issue, then argue that and don't bring up AOE target caps, as that is a completely separate issue.

 

Personally I think this suggestion would be a good thing for a couple of reasons. First off, as the OP says, sometimes you can't avoid getting a second group involved on a big team, and the tank then tries to grab extra aggro, but his current aggro targets then make his team start faceplanting. Increasing this number would make him much more capable of doing his job, which is simply to take a pounding for others.

 

The second reason is actually for those who aren't number crunchers and forum readers. There's still lots of people back to COH who have no idea there even is a aggro cap, and they do things which get teams killed because they are playing like in the early days of the game. You can easily get enemy attention without locking down aggro, and that causes a lot of needless debt when people engage thinking the tank has aggro.

 

To make a point as to why there's really no balance issue here, and as someone who used to herd maps into dumpsters for the nuking, it was the lack of AOE caps that make herding worth your while. As it is now with 14 at best as the AOE cap (outside of incarnate) herding is mostly just a waste of time. A team is more efficient running group to group and steamrolling.

 

A straw man argument is one where an individual assigns an argument to another that that other did not make, and proceeds to refute it. I did not assign an argument to the OP, I merely stated that aggro cap, or aoe target cap, cannot be changed easily, and that I would vote no.

 

I realize he did not discuss aoe, but the two are discussed in another thread, which was the beginning of my post. No straw man.

[jack_nomind]

And I have clearly failed in that goal.

[Purple Spy]

Theres definitely people arguing on both sides and have reasonable points. Personally i think the pros would outweigh the cons. As it stands now say you aggro a second large group. As the tank, i would want to taunt the group, pop cooldowns, and hold aggro for a short duration. Now thanks to my limitations i may begin to bleed individual mobs over time, or even overstep my abilities and die. But i think thats a far cry better than the current option, which is to either ignore them and say sorry team good luck lol, or taunt them, and suddenly these guys I've been fighting for the last 20 seconds go full goldfish and forget i exist.

 

But like i said. We now have the luxury of a test server. I think it's worth experimenting with at the very least.

[Super Atom]

The other thread already got its answer, Aggro limits are global so all or none. With that in mind, raising the aggro limit for all i'd probably go with no personally. I think its fine where its at, the only reason i wanted it raised for tankers was to help with identity by way of utility.

[Machariel]

I think that if teams want to increase the aggro cap, they should increase the "effective" number of enemies that can be engaged at one time, by bringing along archetypes that can pull aggro off of the main tanker and free the tank up to go aggro other groups if desired.  Tanker gets aggro --> Controllers & Dominators apply controls --> aggro drops off Tanker --> Tanker is free to work on the next mob since the previous mob is now nicely grouped and mezzed :)

[jack_nomind]

The other thread already got its answer, Aggro limits are global so all or none.

 

With respect to GM Widower, that's not accurate.  Aggro limits are currently global.  They're also "currently" at 17 (more or less).  Changing it globally might (probably would be) simpler.  Changing it for one archetype -- or for that matter, only for Huge bodies, or only for characters with the string "pe" in their names -- is still reasonably possible.

 

But if we were to go back to the alternative utility ideas back in the other thread I wouldn't exactly be heartbroken...

[Widower]

The other thread already got its answer, Aggro limits are global so all or none.

 

With respect to GM Widower, that's not accurate.  Aggro limits are currently global.  They're also "currently" at 17 (more or less).  Changing it globally might (probably would be) simpler.  Changing it for one archetype -- or for that matter, only for Huge bodies, or only for characters with the string "pe" in their names -- is still reasonably possible.

 

But if we were to go back to the alternative utility ideas back in the other thread I wouldn't exactly be heartbroken...

 

I'm just quoting what I've been told by Leo. I've sent your post to him so he can consider and/or demolish it.

 

Locking this one, go back to the other one...