Focused Feedback: Role Diversity Bonus

[Andreah]

I'm going to take more issue with the idea that your role in a group can be evaluated merely from your AT, rather than from how you actually build and play your character. Unless the game is going to track and evaluate your actions on the team while the content is played, this is ridiculous.

 

A lot of people have referred to the "roles" called out in character creation. Honest to god, those should be removed too. Even there has to be such a thing, I'd put a x/10 score for each AT for how easily it can be built to perform each role. And even that is a gross disservice to how the game actually works.

[psylum1]

2 minutes ago, scottocamp said:

Perhaps you run missions differently - but I try not to be dismissive of the requests people present when offering to join a team.  If folks want to go for a badge, then we try for the badge.  That sort of stuff.  This adds another layer of complexity to all that.  Which will certainly make the experience of leading a team more difficult - at least for me.  

I make my intentions clear all the time and if that's not what another player wants they can grin and bare it or drop the team. 

[Andreah]

4 minutes ago, psylum1 said:

Well then it's a good thing you can only get one per day, then you don't have to worry about it.

How about, since you could only get one per day, you won't miss it when it's not implemented.

[psylum1]

2 minutes ago, Andreah said:

How about, since you could only get one per day, you won't miss it when it's not implemented.

We can go round like this all day. "It won't bother you if it's implemented if it's only once per day."

[psylum1]

15 minutes ago, Andreah said:

As has been said several times, playing without the bonus will be seen as playing with a penalty; that's just human nature.

Playing Regular ITF and Aeon is a penalty because you don't get aether

[arcane]

19 minutes ago, Andreah said:

As has been said several times, playing without the bonus will be seen as playing with a penalty; that's just human nature.

So we can’t have bonuses because some humans are too stupid to comprehend that they’re not being penalized, marginalized, or victimized by the mere existence of rewards they personally aren’t pursuing. That’s bleak shit.

Edited January 24 by arcane

[Andreah]

7 minutes ago, psylum1 said:

We can go round like this all day. "It won't bother you if it's implemented if it's only once per day."

So you agree it wasn't worth the first comment? Let's have productive discussion instead of telling the other side it doesn't bother them when clearly it does.

Edited January 24 by Andreah

[psylum1]

5 minutes ago, Andreah said:

So you agree it wasn't worth the first comment? Let's have productive discussion instead of telling the other side it doesn't bother them when clearly it does.

No, this mechanic is worth exploring and The arguments against it feel really weird.

[csr]

🙄 This is why we can't have nice things.

 

This thread reminds me of being told not to buy a good hose to keep in the front yard because someone might steal it.  15 years and 2 hoses later, none have been stolen.

 

The bottom line for me is that almost all of the complaints against this seem to have one simple solution:  Start your own team.

Edited January 25 by csr

[Ruin Mage]

I want to reiterate that this change cannot be so finely predicted that we can foresee what will happen. The diversity (fuck you this word is cool) bonus is unable to be gamed or min-maxxed to abuseable levels. Teams currently do the whole nitpicking thing depending on the team leader anyway - we can't say if this will make it worse or better.

If the reward was better than 1 Aether per 18 hours, I'd understand half the shit being said here. This is one change that, unironically, can only be seen in full effect when it goes live.

I get it, incentivizing thinking about team make up puts up the big wee-woo sirens for people but being alarmed over one aether is a Choice.

Edited January 24 by Ruin Mage

[ForeverLaxx]

6 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

It's almost like the call went out to come here to this particular thread and defend this feature

I hate that this happens and is one of the primary reasons I stopped throwing my 2 cents in these Feedback threads.

[scottocamp]

37 minutes ago, psylum1 said:

I make my intentions clear all the time and if that's not what another player wants they can grin and bare it or drop the team. 

At present it is not usually that complicated to form a team.  With this mechanic I can imagine evenings where the first four folks I invite turn out to be blasters.  Then the next couple of people decide to drop once they realize they won't get the $3 million bonus.  Or there is a debate about making the blasters switch AT's.  And maybe the blasters don't want to do that.  Or maybe they do and then we all have to wait for three of them to switch.  Or half the team wants the $3 million and the other half just want to get going and not wait.  Or I have to now recruit for a TinPex where there will be no bonus because we already have four blasters and that drags out recruitment.  Or I can boot a couple of the blasters who joined first and try to fill the team with different AT's.  And meanwhile there is grumblings all about.  None of this sounds more fun to me as team leader.  Without this mechanic we could already be on our way to finishing the Tinpex.  Instead I am dealing with stuff I don't really want to be dealing with. 

 

Again - it just seems like an unnecessary mechanic that will discourage even more people from leading teams.  Not the end of the world.  But also not an improvement.

[arcane]

4 minutes ago, scottocamp said:

At present it is not usually that complicated to form a team.  With this mechanic I can imagine evenings where the first four folks I invite turn out to be blasters.  Then the next couple of people decide to drop once they realize they won't get the $3 million bonus.  Or there is a debate about making the blasters switch AT's.  And maybe the blasters don't want to do that.  Or maybe they do and then we all have to wait for three of them to switch.  Or half the team wants the $3 million and the other half just want to get going and not wait.  Or I have to now recruit for a TinPex where there will be no bonus because we already have four blasters and that drags out recruitment.  Or I can boot a couple of the blasters who joined first and try to fill the team with different AT's.  And meanwhile there is grumblings all about.  None of this sounds more fun to me as team leader.  Without this mechanic we could already be on our way to finishing the Tinpex.  Instead I am dealing with stuff I don't really want to be dealing with. 

 

Again - it just seems like an unnecessary mechanic that will discourage even more people from leading teams.  Not the end of the world.  But also not an improvement.

You’re acting like this pressing issue will come up every TF. Remember: it’s one a day. People worth teaming with are going to be flexible and not demanding to do this every round.

[Indystruck]

7 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

 

Wow. It sure is weird all of these accounts that I don't normally see just coming out of the woodwork to comment in this particular thread. Not other threads, not commenting on other subjects, just showing up to comment in this particular thread and no other.

 

 

because one of the first posts was someone being an absolutely perpetually online weirdo about the usage of the term "diversity" if I had to guess

 

[scottocamp]

35 minutes ago, arcane said:

You’re acting like this pressing issue will come up every TF. Remember: it’s one a day. People worth teaming with are going to be flexible and not demanding to do this every round.

That is your argument in favor of this mechanic?  That there won't be problems all the time?

[psylum1]

5 minutes ago, scottocamp said:

That is your argument in favor of this mechanic?  That there won't be problems all the time?

Im not Arcane but that's how I read it. I won't be a constant problem, and I agree with it. 

It won't be anything more than a minor consideration

 

[ranagrande]

I think the comparison with the DFB badges was particularly appropriate.  Yes, people are reasonable when they don't get it.  That's not the point.  The point is that people go for it in the first place.  The presence of a reward has altered the way people play the game.  The same thing will happen here.

 

"But it's only once per day!"  It's once per day per person.  On any given team, there's a strong likelihood that someone hasn't gotten their PA yet.  And we'll almost always accommodate that person, because the CoH playerbase is overwhelmingly composed of nice people (this is a good thing), and no one wants to prevent someone else from getting a reward.

 

If this goes live, I expect the Role Diversity bonus will become the new standard for PUGs within a short amount of time.  Recruiting will become a bit more confusing and time-consuming, teams will become a bit more homogenized, and people will learn that there is, in fact, a "right" way to play, and a very small part of what makes this game so great will be lost.

[Indystruck]

Okay but I suspect it won't.

[ranagrande]

3 minutes ago, Indystruck said:

Okay but I suspect it won't.

OK.  If this does go through, I hope you're right.

[TheZag]

I like the change and hope it makes it live.  Alot of people dont seem to care for it though and im curious if there were a few alternate versions would it help at all.  Like include all 8 players are the same archtype and all are different archtypes with the current version of 5 roles filled.  You will still only be eligible for a single reward but there are multiple ways to earn it.

 

[Reiska]

13 hours ago, psylum1 said:

If you think 1 Aether per character per day is going to flood the market wait till you see what me and my friends do with 4 star advanced modes.

 

For what it's worth, this isn't my concern at all; I'm all for additional vectors for aether in general.  My concerns are about the methodology, not the substance.

 

I'm old.  I've been playing online games for a long time, including this one.  I'd like to think I have a pretty good intuition for how this will affect player behavior.  That said, I'd honestly be overjoyed to be proven wrong in this case!

 

12 hours ago, Marbing said:

So to summarize, the people against this are afraid of the following happening:

 

1) It will ruin the spirit of the game by forcing people to play certain roles.

2) It will add way too many more PA into the market, which will cause a negative disruption of some kind.

3) It will cause people to be booted from teams at a much higher rate than before by team leaders chasing the bonus (which is limited to 1 PA per character per 18 hours).

 

As best as I can tell, the people against it are overwhelmingly concerned about points 1 and 3.  I have not actually seen point 2 brought up by anyone criticizing the system; every post I have seen about point 2 is from a supporter who appears to be misreading people's concerns from skimming the thread rather than reading the arguments in detail.  (It's possible I've missed some posts myself, or that posts in that vein have been hidden/deleted by the moderators.)

 

12 hours ago, psylum1 said:

If you're kicked off a team or can't get one because of a single Aether that team lead was a not great person and would have done it anyway. there are 5 roles to fill and room for 8 on a team. 

 

I fully agree with this, but having the game incentivize this behavior - even if extremely lightly - is likely to amplify it and produce negative vibes where they don't currently exist.

 

11 hours ago, arcane said:

I’m probably defending this feature most because several people in my SG are looking forward to it, and so far the arguments against it have been either highly speculative (“I won’t be able to team”) or downright silly (“I’m being punished!”).
 

On my own, I’d still say it’s a fine change, but I can’t say I’m worried about missing the tiny reward if you guys really do manage to sink this.

 

In case I haven't been clear enough, I think the overall goal of "add more aether vectors" is a worthy one.  But I can't help be concerned that this particular vector is going to introduce a layer of friction to team formation where one currently exists.  And, to be clear, I fear this friction has the potential to be two-sided; while everyone in the thread (including myself) has focused on the hypothetical situation of a tyrannical team leader refusing invites to people for being the wrong ATs to get the bonus, there's also the equally possible bad situation of a wholesome and friendly team leader having increased difficulty filling their team because of individual players refusing to stick around unless the leader ensures the bonus is earned.  (See the quote below)

 

5 hours ago, ranagrande said:

I think the comparison with the DFB badges was particularly appropriate.  Yes, people are reasonable when they don't get it.  That's not the point.  The point is that people go for it in the first place.  The presence of a reward has altered the way people play the game.  The same thing will happen here.

 

"But it's only once per day!"  It's once per day per person.  On any given team, there's a strong likelihood that someone hasn't gotten their PA yet.  And we'll almost always accommodate that person, because the CoH playerbase is overwhelmingly composed of nice people (this is a good thing), and no one wants to prevent someone else from getting a reward.

 

If this goes live, I expect the Role Diversity bonus will become the new standard for PUGs within a short amount of time.  Recruiting will become a bit more confusing and time-consuming, teams will become a bit more homogenized, and people will learn that there is, in fact, a "right" way to play, and a very small part of what makes this game so great will be lost.

 

I couldn't agree with this more.

 

I think this particular issue has generated so much controversy and noise because it's one that gets to the heart of community psychology and overall vibes.  CoH's community and friendly vibes have always been one of the game's strongest draws for people, and as a result, people are deeply fearful of any kind of change that they feel has the possibility to change those vibes.  This isn't new, nor is it unique to Homecoming; similarly strong reactions happened during the Paragon Studios era over the introduction of inventions, the introduction of "Master of TF" badges, the introduction of CoH Freedom (and the chat restrictions placed on free accounts), and the introduction of the Incarnate system, too.

 

In complete fairness, the good news is that in most of those cases, people's fears turned out to be unfounded:

• I never heard of people being kicked from teams on live for not using IO sets.
• People who attempted Master runs were largely okay with the possibility that they might fail and have wasted their time, and in all the attempts I was ever part of, we either re-formed and started over if the failure was early, or simply finished the TF for the normal rewards if it was late
• I also never heard of people being kicked from teams on live for not having incarnates.

The one counterexample I can raise is that I did occasionally see people's tempers get heated when attempts at the ITrial badges (which had bonus merits attached to their success) failed because of mistakes or, rarely, intentional griefing.  And, of course, the common thread there is that there was a tangible reward for succeeding at the task (as opposed to a fully intangible one such as a badge) like there is here (albeit a small one).

 

I'm honestly less worried in the long run about "not getting teams" than I am about people seeing me as "the bad guy" because I'm not personally inclined to drag out the process of forming a team and reject people because they're the wrong ATs for the bonus.  It doesn't matter that much to me; I pretty much "no-life" games.  I do worry it'll be more problematic for more casual players who might only log on long enough to run a single short TF then be done for the night.

[PancakeGnome]

On 1/22/2024 at 8:15 AM, Cobalt Arachne said:

So let me explain the reasoning behind this free bonus:
In most MMOs on the market, they function with the holy trinity of Tank / DPS / Healer. However, City of Heroes does not function this way, and rather has a more diverse set of roles that players take while playing on a team together.

I don't understand why even in the explanation you admit CoH doesn't function with the "typical holy trinity".... and THEN say you want to teach new players that it's actually important in CoH and add a bonus to help them form holy trinity teams....

It would be like saying "City of heroes you can have a wide range of powers and be anything!! No longer are you forced to be a generic knight or cleric from dungeons and dragons!!!..... anyway, that's why we are adding a bonus and tool tips to help encourage new players to be shield / sword tankers, and empathy defender."

Is it a trick or something? Trying to get new players to think of CoH in ways that don't exist? haha

[Parabola]

The issue of how rigid role categorization isn't a great fit for this game can easily be demonstrated as follows. Which of these teams has more control?

 

Team 1:

Tank, blaster, defender, scrapper, scrapper.

 

Team 2:

Tank, blaster, defender, scrapper, controller.

 

Should be team 2 right? The proposed rules certainly consider team 2 to be more diverse.

 

But what if the powersets are as follows:

 

Team 1:

Tank (dark/stone), blaster (ice/ice), defender (dark/dark), scrapper (psi/dark), scrapper (ice/stone).

 

Team 2:

Tank (fire/fire), blaster (fire/fire), defender (emp/fire), scrapper (fire/fire), controller (ill/emp).

 

In team 1 the enemy would be almost permanently controlled. They would be stunned, knocked, slowed, feared, immobilized and held from various sources. There is even a confuse. There is no control AT but barely anything would manage to get attacks off.

 

Team 2 however has a controller but very little control. They have single target hold and confuse but they have to stack mag with themselves. The every spawn control consists of a fear which is going to be constantly broken. Team 2 would probably be a lot of fun (and very burny) but in no way does it have more control than team 1.

 

I'd rather be able to look at a team I was joining and say 'this team needs some control, I'll bring a controlling tank, or a controlling defender', rather than needing to bring a controller to fulfil arbitrary criteria. Similarly with tanking. I've successfully 'tanked' general content using blasters, controllers and defenders. The capability of a character is not rigidly defined by its archetype in this game.

[Dispari]

Well said. Filling roles arbitrarily is the biggest problem with this system. Especially since filling a role can be dubious at best -- you could add someone who's not actually filling that role (Night Widow for control), the game just pretends they are. Or it could be filled by something else (a Mastermind built to tank). Or the game disagrees that something fills the role it obviously does (Corruptor not being support). And why would I go out of my way to add a Controller to an ITF when most of the guys are immune anyway? I'd rather just fill up a team of 8 people and go without thinking about if we filled every role, which I never even think about anyway. I only think in terms of support or tank and then move on. And my definition of what fills those roles is clearly more broad than what this system thinks.

 

If the stated goal is "a bonus for something you're doing anyway," or "something you don't have to think about," it fails on every level. It's more work for everyone, is more stuff to memorize for no reason, tries to enforce a specific arbitrary playstyle on people, and will give people excuses to boot others from TFs. It WILL slow down team formation and encourage bad behavior.

[golstat2003]

18 hours ago, Dispari said:

That's kinda the crux of the debate. A lot of the ATs aren't straightforward or could fill two, three, or even five different roles. Night Widows are not Fortunatas. What a HEAT does depends on how you built it. I would never argue a Corruptor is a damage AT before a support one. A Mastermind could be literally anything. All of these definitions are wobbly and fiddly, and you end up with situations like realizing there are really only two control ATs, and so you have to shove something in there even if it's not. Because you're trying to force all the ATs into neat little boxes that they refuse to fit in, and were never designed to fit in.

At least asking for a variety of ATs is easy for everyone to understand, there's nothing to track or disagree with, and nobody can argue with the results.

 

This is my main issue with how this is currently set up. I agree with Dispari’s suggested fix.