Focused Feedback: Role Diversity Bonus

[Andreah]

3 hours ago, Uun said:

This team has support out the wazoo, yet it fails to get the bonus due to lack of support. 

The real rewards from that team are completing the task force in good time, with good drops, and having had fun along the way. 

 

Any good team, which a diverse team can also be, will get these rewards. No other rewards are necessary.

[Reiska]

On 1/29/2024 at 8:51 AM, Lockely said:

 

Encouraging team diversity and the playing of various other ATs is not a bad thing in the slightest. Using a carrot that's fundamentally not impactful to gameplay is a good way to do that.

What might be a good solution is to give a 20% chance *per* unique AT in a team, versus all this role nonsense. That way, you still have to have 5 unique ATs to qualify for the 100% bonus, but at the same time, no one is faffing about with various roles.

 

Honestly, I could dig this as a reasonable compromise solution.

 

23 hours ago, PoptartsNinja said:

One of the purposes of this seems to be to separate out Defenders and Corruptors, to encourage people to play Defenders more in high level content. So the question is: what about high level content is hostile to Defenders (and Masterminds, and Kheldians)?

 

As others have noted I don't think this is actually an intentional effect, but rather just a product of the fact that the devs wanted it designed such that a team featuring all of the original aligned archetypes together fills the bonus, but villain ATs (having been intentionally designed to hybridize roles rather than specialize) complicate the matter.  You could just about as well argue that Masterminds should be classified under ranged damage rather than support (after all, Corruptor support values are stronger than MM's).

 

Regardless of anything else, if the roles defined at character creation don't match the roles given by this system, you're sending mixed messages, which is bad.

 

As to the original question at the end of the quote: the fact that those ATs do less damage.  The min-max "meta" is to bring the exact minimum amount of tanking, control, and support necessary for an efficient clear, then load up the rest of the slots with pure DPS.  If you don't have enough tanking or support, you'll have to slow down to compensate.

 

Control in general has a pretty low value in most 8-man team scenarios, but especially at level 45+, as most enemies will simply die way too fast to ever apply it and the few that won't (AVs/Heroes) are hard-coded to not be possible to fully control (purple triangles).

[Wobegone]

When I first read it, I loved the idea.  Thought it could really help say....a group of friends who wanted to try the game out.  There is strength in diverse teams, especially early mission/TF teams filled with players who can't afford SOs.  

 

Several of the objections have been from the viewpoint of level 50 characters, including fully kitted and incarnated ones arguing about what 'role' they can or should play.  These objections are irrelevant for TFs filled with unslotted or poorly slotted teams.  And going by what my friends have said when I mentioned playing as a group; most don't want to bother with complexity, at least not right away so SOs and generic IOs appealed to them.  So much of the joy of my early experience with this game was a tank taking agro, a controller controlling, a scrapper and blaster focusing down bosses and lts.  And a defender...bubbling?  It didn't take my early group of friends long to realized that there was more to a defender than healing.  My first 50 was a bubble Defender.  I'm guessing new players here will also figure that out as they (hopefully) play different alts.  

 

Yes, I get it, a fully kitted out level 50 is significantly more durable even in the lowest level TFs. 

Most of the rest of the objections have been people concerned about team leaders requiring such and such.  And they're right.  I'm guessing there'll be a bunch of speed Yin TFs daily chasing the reward...which is not unlike what we already have.  I doubt it will affect much beyond that after a time.   I'm not gonna worry about team makeup when I join a TF.  Are you?  I'll take the occasional happy accident reward thank you, and never give it another thought.

 

For my part, I think the idea is neat.   But in the end, tweak it, pull it, or put it out as is....I don't feel any personal angst no matter the decision.  

Edited January 30 by Ignatz the Insane

[Cyclone Jack]

1 hour ago, BrandX said:

 

Yes, but you also know they want the basic ATs to just count for one role.  

And that's the problem.

 

Basic ATs can, and do, fill multiple roles.  The game even says so during Character Creation.  On top of that, they somehow force *EATs into precisely 3 roles, even if it doesn't make any sense.  A Warshade and Widow are Control?  Really?  A Warshade offers no more control than some of the Melee sets, while a Night Widow has literally 0 (zero) control abilities.  Even Character Creation says: Arachnos Widow: Crowd Control: 2.  So a Corruptor, which has a Support of 8 and Ranged Damage of 7 can only fill the Ranged Damage Role (because Scourge), whereas a Widow with a Control of 2, the lowest of any of the ATs (tied only with Sentinels), can fill the Control Role.

 

"But!"  You say, "The Fortunata has controls!"  And I respond: So do Blasters, Corruptors, Defenders, Stalkers, Scrappers, and Tankers.  In fact, a Blaster,  Corruptor, and Defender are able to have up to 4 (four) single target holds on the same character, while also having access additional controls.

 

No, the reason they made Warshades and Widows Control is because someone said "They must fill 3 roles because *EATs are Epic!" Forgetting that Epic only means that they are tied to the story of world in a much greater way than that of the basic ATs.  Not that they are better, more powerful, or more diverse.

[Wavicle]

Well, don’t overstate the case. Warshades have AoE stuns not matched by any melee. Forts have AoE hold and confuse. It’s not crazy to have those ATs count for Control.

[warlyx]

i still think needed 5 different roles is a mistake , if devs want to keep the idea of change it to Archetype diversity instead , the idea of 5 different ATs is waaaay better , u dont feel forced to get a "tank" if there is none LFT or no1 in the team feels forced to log into their tank (or w/e is missing on the team ) . Or maybe ppl wont care about bonus and or maybe the leader does and kick some1 , or maybe some1 leaves because no bonus , in the end teaming is going to be more frustrating 

 

u can grab a Blaster x2, Corr , Troller, Def , Sent and whatever it ask u for invite , because IN COH DOESNT MATTER !

 

and thats what we should teach to new players that in this game u can group up with anyone and do the content , im sure they will be more impressed that a game has this "FREEDOM" and isnt forced into the "trinity" system 

 

 

 

[Cyclone Jack]

1 hour ago, Wavicle said:

Well, don’t overstate the case. Warshades have AoE stuns not matched by any melee. Forts have AoE hold and confuse. It’s not crazy to have those ATs count for Control.

So a short duration AoE Stun and a moderate duration Cone Stun with a single target Hold and Immobilize is enough for it to fill the Control slot?  While I will agree that it at least has some control, is a Warshade's Control so much better than a Corruptors ability for Support?  Or a Defenders ability for Ranged Damage?  Or an Ice/Ice/Ice Blaster's ability for Control?  Oh, but you say, we're talking about a broad overview of the AT, not individual powers, right?

 

Enter the Fortunata.  If we're talking about a broad overview of the AT, is it OK to give the Widow a Control Role, when only one powerset has any controls?  So if you bring a Night Widow onto the team, a character with literally zero control powers, magically the Control Role is fulfilled?  Literally every other AT has access to more controls than a Night Widow, including a Sentinel, but sure, ya lets call them a Controller, because they are Epic! Must fill 3 roles!!!

 

Heck, the fact that Soldiers and Widows fill the Support Role (and are even listed as Support in Character Creation) boggles my mind, because outside of a debuff or two, the only real support they have is a built in Leadership pool.  If that is what's considered Support, three toggles that are accessible by every character in the game, while Corruptors are not, then there's a fundamental problem with this design.

[Wavicle]

Yea, because Widows CAN spec to be EITHER melee OR control, so they fill both roles for the purpose of this bonus. The fact that any of this boggles anyone's mind when it's just a little bonus mechanic, is itself mind boggling. The reasons they placed each AT where they did have been explained and are quite clear. Not understanding it can only be willful at this point.

[lemming]

Maybe just a AT Diversity bonus is the way to go.   Any five types get the bonus.

[HV]eats lower the number by two.

And Sentinels lower the number by one.  (Just because people diss them, so no logic involved. 😉 )

 

So, any three member team with an Epic would get the bonus.   Any four with a sentinel would.   (And I suppose a four member with two sentinels would)

[Cyclone Jack]

56 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Yea, because Widows CAN spec to be EITHER melee OR control, so they fill both roles for the purpose of this bonus. The fact that any of this boggles anyone's mind when it's just a little bonus mechanic, is itself mind boggling. The reasons they placed each AT where they did have been explained and are quite clear. Not understanding it can only be willful at this point.

So Widows can fill Melee OR Control, but Corruptors can ONLY fill Ranged Damage, and Defenders can ONLY fill Support?  Perfectly Balanced.

 

Also, when pertaining to this feature, its not an OR, its an AND.  A Widow fulfils Melee, Ranged, AND Control.  Corruptors ONLY fulfil Ranged.

Edited January 30 by Cyclone Jack

[Wavicle]

37 minutes ago, Cyclone Jack said:

So Widows can fill Melee OR Control, but Corruptors can ONLY fill Ranged Damage, and Defenders can ONLY fill Support?  Perfectly Balanced.

 

Also, when pertaining to this feature, its not an OR, its an AND.  A Widow fulfils Melee, Ranged, AND Control.  Corruptors ONLY fulfil Ranged.

It’s a logic puzzle. You have to put it together using the guidelines laid out in the pinned post. It’s NOT a perfect representation of how the game works, that’s understood.

[Lazarillo]

2 hours ago, Wavicle said:

It’s a logic puzzle. You have to put it together using the guidelines laid out in the pinned post. It’s NOT a perfect representation of how the game works, that’s understood.

The problem is that the "logic" guiding the puzzle is too arbitrary to be practical.  "We have to have exactly one role per AT and exactly two ATs for each role, but also EATs each get three roles and they can be whatever" is, as you noted, not a representation of how the game works.  But there's nothing that says the requirements can't be a representation of how the game works except for stubborn adherence to rules that were made up for the sake of having rules in the first place.

Edited January 31 by Lazarillo

[Cyclone Jack]

22 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

It’s a logic puzzle. You have to put it together using the guidelines laid out in the pinned post. It’s NOT a perfect representation of how the game works, that’s understood.

And exactly how is that going to help new players understand Archetype roles when it is not a representation of the game?  And I quote:

 

Quote

This new bonus is to help guide players who are unfamiliar with City of Heroes to the basic fundamentals of team building and archetype roles,

 

[Wavicle]

18 minutes ago, Lazarillo said:

The problem is that the "logic" guiding the puzzle is too arbitrary practical.  "We have to have exactly one role per AT and exactly two ATs for each role, but also EATs each get three roles and they can be whatever" is, as you noted, not a representation of how the game works.  But there's nothing that says the requirements can't be a representation of how the game works except for stubborn adherence to rules that were made up for the sake of having rules in the first place.

Well, the Fairness of one Role per AT except for the Epics is addressed in that post, but sure, I hear you.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Cyclone Jack said:

And exactly how is that going to help new players understand Archetype roles when it is not a representation of the game?  And I quote:

 

 

 

Yea, and if you look at my other posts in the thread I made this exact same observation, so I suppose we'll see if any of it sticks in the next build. My guess is they end up cutting it completely because of the philosophical objections. If they could find a way to do it that was closer to reflecting the true diversity of the game then it might work.

[Riverdusk]

On 1/22/2024 at 4:15 AM, Cobalt Arachne said:

This new bonus is to help guide players who are unfamiliar with City of Heroes to the basic fundamentals of team building and archetype roles

 

IMO, this teaches exactly the wrong lesson on CoH team building.  For me one of the biggest strengths of CoH over a "typical" MMO is that any team can work well.   Heck, a team of all "support" are often the strongest teams you can build.  I remember the crazy things the all radiation emission teams did back in the old days for example.

 

I don't think implementing this will be the apocalypse or anything, but I find the whole concept of it and why it is even necessary....puzzling, at best.

 

As others have suggested, if this is done, I'd also like to at least see some other team compositions added to the list (such as a team of at least 5 that are all the SAME AT or even "role").  Just to show specifically how well that can also work and to help show off how flexible team composition is in this game.

 

As it stands now, like I said, I think it teaches exactly the wrong lesson and it is basically saying you need some sort of "holy" or special team composition in order to be the best, which is just plain inaccurate when it comes to teaming in CoH.

 

Oh, and it could just be renamed as "Team Composition Bonus" in that case.

Edited January 30 by Riverdusk

[arcane]

I’m a little more hopeful that this change will see the light of day since it survived to Build 2 and no one has really come up with any new arguments against it that we hadn’t heard in Build 1. I see the same users are spinning their wheels trying desperately to sink the change, but hopefully the devs are able to see through the BS.

[Cyclone Jack]

21 minutes ago, arcane said:

I’m a little more hopeful that this change will see the light of day since it survived to Build 2 and no one has really come up with any new arguments against it that we hadn’t heard in Build 1.

Yeah, that's my fear, too. 😉😜🤣

 

At the end of the day, HC will do what HC wants to do.  I've left my feedback and that's all any of us can really do.  I'm not gonna be mad or rage quit or throw my virtual hands up into the air and declare that "I don't want to live on this planet anymore." if this goes through as is.  I'd be a little disappointed at best, then go back to playing the game with my friends and our dozens upon dozens of alts. 😄

[Wavicle]

Yep, and most teams will get the bonus, a few won’t, some team leaders will care, but most probably won’t.

[Wavicle]

Maybe they should just rename Support to Pets. THAT would fix it! 😜

Edited January 30 by Wavicle

[BrandX]

4 hours ago, Cyclone Jack said:

And that's the problem.

 

Basic ATs can, and do, fill multiple roles.  The game even says so during Character Creation.  On top of that, they somehow force *EATs into precisely 3 roles, even if it doesn't make any sense.  A Warshade and Widow are Control?  Really?  A Warshade offers no more control than some of the Melee sets, while a Night Widow has literally 0 (zero) control abilities.  Even Character Creation says: Arachnos Widow: Crowd Control: 2.  So a Corruptor, which has a Support of 8 and Ranged Damage of 7 can only fill the Ranged Damage Role (because Scourge), whereas a Widow with a Control of 2, the lowest of any of the ATs (tied only with Sentinels), can fill the Control Role.

 

"But!"  You say, "The Fortunata has controls!"  And I respond: So do Blasters, Corruptors, Defenders, Stalkers, Scrappers, and Tankers.  In fact, a Blaster,  Corruptor, and Defender are able to have up to 4 (four) single target holds on the same character, while also having access additional controls.

 

No, the reason they made Warshades and Widows Control is because someone said "They must fill 3 roles because *EATs are Epic!" Forgetting that Epic only means that they are tied to the story of world in a much greater way than that of the basic ATs.  Not that they are better, more powerful, or more diverse.

 

That doesn't matter.  It's not that Basic ATs can and do, it's that if you pick certain sets, they can fill multiple rolls.

But however, seeing the complaints, I don't think it's a matter of the rolls.  I think people really want to get this reward, so they REALLY want to get it easy.  It's easy to understand that they wanted to make a rule that the basic ATs only count for 1 thing and the epic ATs count  for 3.

 

Makes sense for that rule on this.  I guess people really want that reward all the time.

[Cyclone Jack]

33 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Maybe they should just rename Support to Pets. THAT would fix it! 😜

Then I'd never qualify, because my teammates are my pets. 😜🤣

 

 

9 minutes ago, BrandX said:

 

That doesn't matter.  It's not that Basic ATs can and do, it's that if you pick certain sets, they can fill multiple rolls.

But however, seeing the complaints, I don't think it's a matter of the rolls.  I think people really want to get this reward, so they REALLY want to get it easy.  It's easy to understand that they wanted to make a rule that the basic ATs only count for 1 thing and the epic ATs count  for 3.

 

Makes sense for that rule on this.  I guess people really want that reward all the time.

I couldn't care less about the reward; in fact, remove the reward and see how many people still want this as is. 

 

I care about sending a cohesive message to new players; you know, the entire purpose of this feature.  This does not match what is in Character Creation, nor does it help inform new players about the diversity of the ATs.  In fact, it does the opposite by reducing basic ATs to a single role.  That is my problem with it.

[Wavicle]

2 minutes ago, Cyclone Jack said:

Then I'd never qualify, because my teammates are my pets. 😜

I was saying Defenders would still be in that category for exactly that reason. 😁

 

I agree I wish the feature did a better job showing what roles an AT is actually likely to play. That means, yes, some basic ATs get more than one.

[ranagrande]

1 hour ago, BrandX said:

 

That doesn't matter.  It's not that Basic ATs can and do, it's that if you pick certain sets, they can fill multiple rolls.

But however, seeing the complaints, I don't think it's a matter of the rolls.  I think people really want to get this reward, so they REALLY want to get it easy.  It's easy to understand that they wanted to make a rule that the basic ATs only count for 1 thing and the epic ATs count  for 3.

 

Makes sense for that rule on this.  I guess people really want that reward all the time.

I would prefer for the reward not to exist at all.

[Grouchybeast]

On 1/22/2024 at 12:15 PM, 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.

This new bonus is to help guide players who are unfamiliar with City of Heroes to the basic fundamentals of team building and archetype roles, and then giving a small reward to teams that are inclusive and bring every type of player role. Perhaps the name of the reward should be changed to 'Role Inclusivity Bonus'?

The reason behind the Role Diversity Bonus didn't make a lot of sense when I read it at first, so thanks for pinning the explanation.

A Prismatic Aether is a nice reward idea.  It's an easy sell on the AH without needing to get into crafting.  And I like the idea of showing new players the principles of how to put a team together, because with the CoH and CoV ATs all available it's a little overwhelming.  I'm not sure this is the right way to go about it, though.

Firstly, it feels like you're pushing new players towards rolling the Epic ATs, because they'll see that those ATs make it easier to get this bonus.  A free Prismatic Aether is a much bigger deal to a new player, and they're likely to chase it harder than a vet who's already sitting on a pile of inf.  I don't think we should be making the Epic ATs unusually attractive to new players, because they're a steep learning curve for someone who's never played the game before.

 

Second, this skews towards rewarding teams where the players have a selection of characters they can easily choose from, i.e. vets rather than newbies.  (It would also be a bummer for a static team of friends that doesn't hit the requirements.)

Third, some of the category choices are odd!  This feels like the kind of idea that you have when you're sitting around chatting, and in the abstract it seems brilliant.  And when you start slotting the ATs into roles it starts off great: blaster, tanker, controller, defender, all easy, looking good.  Then you get towards the end and some of the boxes aren't full, and some of them have too many ATs and you start shuffling ATs around trying to get it all tidy and even.  Finally you're left with Corruptors and Masterminds, and a space in Ranged Damage and Support, so you toss them in there and phew, it's done!

Again, not the best when you're trying to guide new players.  Character creation already explains the AT roles, and those are in conflict with this system in some cases.

I guess it could also make people setting up TFs picker about teams, but I guess we won't really know that until it's live.  It seems a shame, though, to add yet another factor to juggle when putting together a team for a TF.  There's always a shortage of people willing to run teams.  I don't think complicating TF team building further is good when the game is hopefully seeing an influx of new players.

I mean, at the end of the day, this wouldn't affect me.  I mostly solo and duo, and if I do join a TF then I have a bunch of different characters so if someone asks me to swap, I can.  An occasional free PA is nice!  For me it's NBD, maybe a few more minutes waiting for a TF to start.  I can just tool around in the AH while I'm waiting.  It's seems like a slightly counterproductive way to approach the stated goal, though.
 

[Doc_Scorpion]

4 hours ago, Grouchybeast said:

A Prismatic Aether is a nice reward idea.  It's an easy sell on the AH without needing to get into crafting.  And I like the idea of showing new players the principles of how to put a team together, because with the CoH and CoV ATs all available it's a little overwhelming.  I'm not sure this is the right way to go about it, though.

It's not, because by and large it's not new players that are forming TFs/SFs and paying attention to what ATs are being hired in.  At best, they're going to see the "Bonus Eligible" icon pop up and eventually learn that means they're going to get a bonus.  They might eventually learn a little by osmosis, but that will be in the context of "earning a bonus", not in the context of "this is a superior team".  (For an arbitrary definition of "superior".)