essay EXP gains should be shared to all players in a particular neighborhood

[gabrilend]

City of Heroes is known for it's vibrant, beautiful, and diverse overworld. One if it's finest qualities is the verisimilitude of the city - it feels alive, like a real living breathing place. A major part of this is due to the civilians who wander around and greet you if you say hi. The mobs that your character can fight will often terrorize one of these lovely people, and that tugs at the heartstrings of any righteous hero.

 

Of course, a villain might see the same situation and decide that these pre-occupied goons are a perfect target for assassination. Perhaps the civilian will cower in terror before them and offer up their meagre life's possessions, or perhaps whatever information they know will be a valuable tip for them in their exploits to come.

 

In either case, there is an inherent incentive for players to contest these wandering enemies and their acts of terror. I believe that mechanics should be added which encourage players to engage with the overworld as if it was any other piece of content, for the developers certainly intended as such. Consider the amount of effort and variety given to the design of each and every environment, and if you share my perspective then you will see a labor of love.

 

However there is little reason for players to wander around on patrol looking for trouble. Their attention is too often drawn to missions and task forces to bother with such trivialities, and indeed most players would rather hang out in Atlas Park waiting for something interesting to happen. I believe that this impulse is fundamentally due to their desire to play on a team, and Atlas Park is just the best place to be around a lot of people.

 

Therefore, I suggest adding mechanics that both encourage engagement with the overworld but also connect players and bring them into natural, organic teams. My first suggestion is this: share all exp gained from fighting enemies to all players in the local neighborhood. I believe this will encourage players to fight in the overworld, and if AFKers are a concern then perhaps make it so that after 2 minutes of inactivity you stop gaining this type of EXP until you engage with an opponent again.

 

This encourages overworld play, however it does not necessarily bring players together. To that end I suggest placing players who mark themselves as "looking for patrol team" in the team finder into auto-generated groups on a per-neighborhood basis. I believe this is a more difficult solution, however I think that being on a team gives players a sense of companionship, and the auto-generated nature of it allows for them to enter / leave teams easily simply by moving neighborhoods. Not only will this connect players who are at similar levels, it will also give them a way to grant each other buffs and support one another if they're in peril.

 

Currently, patrol teams tend to group up and snowball around fighting purple or red enemy groups. This I believe is an anti-pattern because it's too closely aligned to the style of gameplay performed in mission teams, where fighting high level enemies is expected and encouraged through the increased EXP gains and our ability to customize the difficulty of missions. In the proposed system where players are placed into teams based on geographic location, it will be natural for players to spread out and explore because of the larger spaces they inhabit. In addition they will be encouraged to fight similarly leveled opponents, because if their team disbands (due to outleveling the area or perhaps from going to sleep or switching characters) then they will be left in an area that is out of sync with their player's level, and so will have to spend time walking to a train station or a boat or whatever when they're left all alone.

 

Important to note is that the lackey/malefactor and sidekick/exemplar system must be disabled for these types of auto-generated teams.

 

Not only would this open up new styles of gameplay for players to engage with, it will do so without necessitating the development of new art assets. All that would be needed would be programmatic alterations, and while my understanding is that CoX has a legacy codebase full of spaghetti, code is often much easier to develop than art for this kind of team.

 

To summarize:

1. sharing exp (but not infamy/influence) to all players in a particular neighborhood will encourage players to engage with the overworld content

2. placing players onto auto-generated teams based on geographic proximity and limited to their current neighborhood will help bring players together

3. engaging with content in new ways (by encouraging fighting similarly leveled opponents and spreading out to find more foes) gives players more options for how to play and increases their engagement with the game we all know and love.

 

Thank you for reading.

[Luminara]

5 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

1. sharing exp (but not infamy/influence) to all players in a particular neighborhood will encourage players to engage with the overworld content

 

In the same way it encourages door-sitters to engage with farm content?

 

Also, with every zone now being a farm and players obliterating spawns faster than they can render, how do you ensure that players with Defeat X of <enemy group> open-world missions can actually complete those missions?

[Rudra]

Players already have to turn off xp to do all content, so let's just make them have to turn off xp while outside of instance missions so they don't outlevel the content they are already doing just for being in the game? Pass.

[gabrilend]

1 minute ago, Luminara said:

 

In the same way it encourages door-sitters to engage with farm content?

 

 

Ah yes I was concerned about that as well. Which is why I said: "I believe this will encourage players to fight in the overworld, and if AFKers are a concern then perhaps make it so that after 2 minutes of inactivity you stop gaining this type of EXP until you engage with an opponent again."

 

Do you think that solution wouldn't adequately address the "world-sitters"? I'm open to hearing suggestions, of course.

 

2 minutes ago, Luminara said:

Also, with every zone now being a farm and players obliterating spawns faster than they can render, how do you ensure that players with Defeat X of <enemy group> open-world missions can actually complete those missions?

 

 

I don't think there's enough players to support that kind of issue. Over time players would spread out to whichever zone they were leveled to (as encouraged by the proposed auto-party mechanics) and I believe that would ensure enough dispersal that it wouldn't be an issue. Perhaps disable this behavior at level 50, or re-enable the malefactor/exemplar system for level 50s and bring them to the average level of each neighborhood?

 

Also, the current open-world missions aren't too difficult to complete. If there are enemy types in a particular area, there's typically enough around for you to be able to find the kind that you'd need. Are there specific missions you had in mind that target rare mobs? I was only aware of the kind that are like "defeat 8 hellions" or "defeat 8 Crey units". But if they were more specific, like "defeat 8 embalmed Vahzilok corpses" or "defeat 8 Clockwork Tesla Knights" then perhaps that would be a bigger concern than I'm expecting.

 

1 minute ago, Rudra said:

Players already have to turn off xp to do all content, so let's just make them have to turn off xp while outside of instance missions so they don't outlevel the content they are already doing just for being in the game? Pass.

 

I see what you mean. Perhaps this would be an "opt-in" system, like the auto-generated groups I suggested which (as proposed) are only applied when the player marks themselves as "looking for patrol team" in the team finder interface.

[biostem]

I kind of feel like XP should be limited to line of sight and/or possibly requiring each character to do *something* - whether that mean using attacks, buffs, or otherwise contribute in some way...

Edited April 19 by biostem

[gabrilend]

14 minutes ago, biostem said:

I kind of feel like XP should be limited to line of sight and/or possibly requiring each character to do *something* - whether that mean using attacks, buffs, or otherwise contribute in some way...

 

That makes sense from a thematic point of view (how could you learn anything from a fight you didn't engage in?) but it severely hampers the implementation of the proposed idea, as players are intended to be encouraged to spread out in the neighborhood rather than clump up within eye-sight range, as they do currently in most missions. They'd still be encouraged to fight alongside one another, because it's always easier and more fun to do so, however they would not be punished for going their own way or by being abandoned by their teammates.

 

I believe that the benefits offered are greater than the negatives caused by this issue. Perhaps the EXP gain could be explained in canon as heroes discussing their engagements with friends after the fact, while the player is logged off? Or possibly since the area is being cleared, the new enemies that wander in to replace them are less experienced, and thus slightly easier for your character to fight (purely thematic, no mechanical buffs or debuffs applied)

 

Benefits:

increased presence in the open world, giving new environments for players to explore

alternative playstyle involving protecting/hunting in a neighborhood

increased teamplay due to the dynamic companionship from wandering players

 

Negatives:

potential for AFK abuse

thematic issues with earning exp out of earshot

reduces capability to accomplish open-world missions (of which there are but a few)

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but one of those lists appears more valuable to me than the other. So I guess I'm saying "a little evil for a greater good" which is quite a vigilante thing to say, now that I think of it.

[Krimson]

56 minutes ago, Luminara said:

 

In the same way it encourages door-sitters to engage with farm content?

 

Also, with every zone now being a farm and players obliterating spawns faster than they can render, how do you ensure that players with Defeat X of <enemy group> open-world missions can actually complete those missions?

There's no way it would freaking compete. Like, you might get the odd XP trickle once in a while because someone is street sweeping? As someone who made a hobby of Giant Monster hunting, I know how often most zones have no players at all.

 

Don't oppose this because it might be similar to farming. Oppose it because the effort to make it happen isn't worth the result. Not enough players will use it to make it worthwhile.

[MJABBAR88]

I like this, encourages me To chill whilst you heroes do all the work 

[biostem]

18 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

players are intended to be encouraged to spread out in the neighborhood rather than clump up within eye-sight range, as they do currently in most missions

My comment was somewhat meant to be tongue-in-cheek.  That being said, I think missions where you need to defeat X enemies in a certain zone or specific part of that zone should reward players who actually  contributed to said defeats.

[McSpazz]

I recently had the pleasure of finishing a self imposed challenge of getting a character from level 1 to 50 using only street sweeping. I like the concept of rewarding all active players in a zone for actively participating in attempts to fight crime, but that experience leaves me with some concerns that go beyond those brought up already, but there are two that stand out in particular.

The first is that I feel like before this can be made into a satisfying and fun experience, zones themselves first need to be improved. Specifically related to enemy placement and a sense of a zone having purpose. If you look at the zones released or modified towards the end of the game's lifespan and compare it to its older maps, you can see what I mean, but I think a more direct comparison between Echo: Atlas and modern Atlas can paint a more stark picture. In the modern iteration, it doesn't feel like enemies are literally in control of the city and ruling the streets. Different parts of the city have different issues that need to be addressed. Older maps in Paragon and to a somewhat lesser extent in the Rogue Isles, the zones feel far more like spaces for you to move through between missions with enemies peppered throughout. Newer zones also have something that would be vital to making this feel at all rewarding: something the street sweeping is building up to. Something akin to Homecoming changing things so that Scrapyarder defeats can spawn Scrapyard. Each zone where you implemented zonewide shared exp would need something like that to justify people doing this rather than just running through a mission and getting an immediate burst of feedback.

The second issue is kind of related to that "each zone" comment, though. That's the number of zones Paragon has versus the Rogue Isles. In short, the best implementation of this would be a repeated zonewide event where you work with other heroes in a zone to fight to retake a hazard zone. I'd personally love to see that. However, this isn't something that would be worthwhile implementing in Praetoria in the immediate future (as it would require creating something akin to a hazard zone for retaking Praetoria from Hamidon) and thee Rogue Isles doesn't have hazard zones at all.

There's definitely something to be said about a slower paced, larger group effort of sweeping through a zone, but I don't think we currently have the metaphorical infrastructure to do it.

[gabrilend]

28 minutes ago, McSpazz said:

I recently had the pleasure of finishing a self imposed challenge of getting a character from level 1 to 50 using only street sweeping. I like the concept of rewarding all active players in a zone for actively participating in attempts to fight crime, but that experience leaves me with some concerns that go beyond those brought up already, but there are two that stand out in particular.

 

What a lovely challenge! I'd love to hear more about that. I usually play that way, but when I get lonely I sometimes do newspaper missions or team up with other party members. It fills me with a sense of longing for a more populated city/island.

 

Quote

The first is that I feel like before this can be made into a satisfying and fun experience, zones themselves first need to be improved. Specifically related to enemy placement and a sense of a zone having purpose. If you look at the zones released or modified towards the end of the game's lifespan and compare it to its older maps, you can see what I mean, but I think a more direct comparison between Echo: Atlas and modern Atlas can paint a more stark picture. In the modern iteration, it doesn't feel like enemies are literally in control of the city and ruling the streets. Different parts of the city have different issues that need to be addressed. Older maps in Paragon and to a somewhat lesser extent in the Rogue Isles, the zones feel far more like spaces for you to move through between missions with enemies peppered throughout. Newer zones also have something that would be vital to making this feel at all rewarding: something the street sweeping is building up to. Something akin to Homecoming changing things so that Scrapyarder defeats can spawn Scrapyard. Each zone where you implemented zonewide shared exp would need something like that to justify people doing this rather than just running through a mission and getting an immediate burst of feedback.

 

I think this is absolutely a wonderful idea. Having an increased threat monster arise due to the presence of heroes, or maybe an archvillain shows up to stomp on all the lesser villains, something to that effect.

 

Perhaps there's a hidden counter or meter that fills up as players fight monsters in the zone, and when a certain amount have been defeated a hero/archvillain is spawned that is thematically appropriate for that level range. That's a decent reward, but I believe it's a little similar to the Giant Monster mechanic. Perhaps an additional twist is necessary...!

 

What if this archvillain/hero that spawns is of the opposite alignment to the zone. So, for example, if you're in Paragon City, an archvillain would spawn who was hostile to the players *and* the normal enemies present. So a neighborhood in Atlas Park for example which is mostly populated by Hellions would have an archvillain spawn who was drawn to the fighting for some reason and wanders around much like a player does fighting both heroes and Hellions. I believe that would encourage players to fight them, because not only would they be worth a lot of exp and infamy/influence, they also would be reducing the potential targets for their street sweeping patrol.

 

There's currently already a large group of NPC costumes created for the bank heist missions. Perhaps after (100 * number of players in zone) enemy units are slain / arrested / beaten down, it spawns a hero/archvillain in a random neighborhood? Ideally, without any proclamation or explanation of their presence. That way players would have to hunt them down.

 

Basically mirroring the players and using the same behavior they're using, but for the opposite side.

 

Quote

The second issue is kind of related to that "each zone" comment, though. That's the number of zones Paragon has versus the Rogue Isles. In short, the best implementation of this would be a repeated zonewide event where you work with other heroes in a zone to fight to retake a hazard zone. I'd personally love to see that. However, this isn't something that would be worthwhile implementing in Praetoria in the immediate future (as it would require creating something akin to a hazard zone for retaking Praetoria from Hamidon) and thee Rogue Isles doesn't have hazard zones at all.

 

It seems to me that the kind of mechanic you're suggesting is already in the game. We have Rikti invasions and Nemesis plots and various other events that occur at randomized intervals which draw players to certain zones. I believe those mechanics are useful and interesting, but they do not accomplish the same goals I have when presenting this idea. Namely, they work to *concentrate* players in particular zones, while my idea is intended to *disperse* players throughout whichever zone they're most suitable for level-wise.

 

The idea is that you'll be playing as you normally do, sweeping the streets, and you'll occasionally be grouped up with a fellow player or three who are also doing the same thing. You'll share EXP, and be able to see their location / health bars which should allow you to coordinate easier. And if you want to move on or do something else, all you have to do is walk away and you'll be put into a different group or given space to yourself again.

[McSpazz]

10 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

It seems to me that the kind of mechanic you're suggesting is already in the game. We have Rikti invasions and Nemesis plots and various other events that occur at randomized intervals which draw players to certain zones. I believe those mechanics are useful and interesting, but they do not accomplish the same goals I have when presenting this idea. Namely, they work to *concentrate* players in particular zones, while my idea is intended to *disperse* players throughout whichever zone they're most suitable for level-wise.

 

The idea is that you'll be playing as you normally do, sweeping the streets, and you'll occasionally be grouped up with a fellow player or three who are also doing the same thing. You'll share EXP, and be able to see their location / health bars which should allow you to coordinate easier. And if you want to move on or do something else, all you have to do is walk away and you'll be put into a different group or given space to yourself again.

 

The mechanics kind of already exist in game. There is already a means to measure the number of a specific type of enemy defeated (as per giant monsters like Caleb and Scrapyard) and there are events that track involvement without the use of groups (the Zig breakout, the St. Martial casino raid, etc). The hard part is that JUST street sweeping is already entirely possible with teams. To justify the amount of development work (both design and implementation) to not just make exp shared zone wide for rando kills but also to find a means of preventing leeches, the event has to actually be something more than JUST street sweeping. I'm thinking something along the lines of how Recluse's Victory works just without the PvP. To complicate things even more, for such a suggestion, it would be advisable to ensure that people outside of the level range cannot contribute. So the enemies that count towards the zone event would either need to be unbound by level (ie: Rikti invasion) or introduce some kind of teamless level shift.

Again, I think the best implementation for this would be within hazard zones that, as of now, really don't see any real traffic. I have no idea how this could be done red side, though.

Also...

10 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

What a lovely challenge! I'd love to hear more about that. I usually play that way, but when I get lonely I sometimes do newspaper missions or team up with other party members. It fills me with a sense of longing for a more populated city/island.

I posted about it here.

Edited April 20 by McSpazz

[Rudra]

12 minutes ago, McSpazz said:

So the enemies that count towards the zone event would either need to be unbound by level (ie: Rikti invasion)

This was already tried. To summon Paladin in King's Row I believe. It was so hated and ignored, the change got rolled back to the original summons method.

[kelika2]

2 hours ago, biostem said:

I kind of feel like XP should be limited to line of sight and/or possibly requiring each character to do *something* - whether that mean using attacks, buffs, or otherwise contribute in some way...

I would just use my second build for Invis when leveling up alts at that point.

 

but I agree with the OP even tho I didnt read the post.  I highly doubt there will be gangs of people roaming around the world taking advantage claiming zones are their own and this would encourage people to hunt outdoors a bit or get a little something when doing a weird hunt-10

Edited April 20 by kelika2

[gabrilend]

5 minutes ago, kelika2 said:

but I agree with the OP even tho I didnt read the post.  I highly doubt there will be gangs of people roaming around the world taking advantage claiming zones are their own and this would encourage people to hunt outdoors a bit or get a little something when doing a weird hunt-10

 

lol thanks I guess? xD

 

8 minutes ago, Rudra said:

This was already tried. To summon Paladin in King's Row I believe. It was so hated and ignored, the change got rolled back to the original summons method.

 

Yes I don't think that this would work very well. I think that disconnecting mobs from their level is against the ethos of an MMO with a living breathing world. It makes the world feel less alive, if there's no difference where you are. The level scaling in modern versions of WoW do something similar to this, and I don't really like it. Really kills the sense of progression as you level.

 

23 minutes ago, McSpazz said:

To justify the amount of development work (both design and implementation) to not just make exp shared zone wide for rando kills but also to find a means of preventing leeches, the event has to actually be something more than JUST street sweeping.

 

Just to clarify, I don't think that EXP should be shared with the entire zone, just the entire neighborhood.

 

When you're looking at a map, there are a few pale blue dots that correspond to the green/yellow/orange/red areas on the map. Each of those would count as a "neighborhood" for the purposes of this idea.

 

24 minutes ago, McSpazz said:

The hard part is that JUST street sweeping is already entirely possible with teams.

 

I agree, but unfortunately people don't often join teams for it. And when they do, it's localized to a particular area, and they feel frustrated when they run out of enemies to fight. So they seek tougher challenges with their larger teams, rather than dispersing and fighting similarly leveled foes, as the game is balanced around as far as hard character stats like health and accuracy and such go. Increasing the AoE of EXP dispersal would help and could be a decent alternative to my idea, but I think my idea is better both thematically and mechanically. The primary downside is the development cost and potential for lack of player interest.

[Luminara]

2 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

Ah yes I was concerned about that as well. Which is why I said: "I believe this will encourage players to fight in the overworld, and if AFKers are a concern then perhaps make it so that after 2 minutes of inactivity you stop gaining this type of EXP until you engage with an opponent again."

 

Do you think that solution wouldn't adequately address the "world-sitters"?

 

I think this would be construed as a direct assault on farming unless the restriction were specific to open-world content.  And if it was set up that way, it wouldn't act as encouragement to participate in open-world content, as it offers nothing to make it more desirable than, or even equally desirable to, TFs, Trials, raids, scanner/newspaper missions, tips, or even plain old story arcs.  It isn't even comparably rewarding for people who just want to street sweep, since they can street sweep now and gain inf* in addition to XP.

 

In fact, for anything other than power-leveling, it's pointless, and for power-leveling, it's over the top.  Let's take 100 level 25 characters into Talos and have everyone defeat one minion (96 XP at level 25).  Everyone in the neighborhood would receive 96 * 100 = 9600 XP.  If they do that four times per minute, 9600 * 4 = 38,400 XP per minute.  In just over 2 minutes, everyone's level 26 (85,200 XP to go from 25 to 26).

 

At level 49, a minion is worth 2464 XP.  2464 * 100 = 246,400.  246,400 * 4 = 985,600 XP per minute.  That's almost exactly 5 minutes from level 49 to level 50.

 

Rough estimation: somewhere between 3 and 4 hours to hit level 50, doing nothing but beating down minion every 15 seconds.  No bosses, not even lieutenants, just minions, and not taking 2x XP or Patrol XP into account.  Start tossing in those variables and you have players lazily cruising to 50 in about 90 minutes, and the only reason it would take that long is because they'd have to move once in a while.

 

I can't see any developer with any sense allowing that, so it'd likely have a massive XP penalty attached to keep it in check.  So now what's the point?  The XP rate would be crippled so it wasn't any better than any other option, it offers nothing else in the way of rewards... and, what, people jump at the chance to do it, and get a warm, fuzzy feeling about being shafted because they're being shafted amongst company?

 

24 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

Also, the current open-world missions aren't too difficult to complete. If there are enemy types in a particular area, there's typically enough around for you to be able to find the kind that you'd need.

 

They're not difficult to complete now.  If players start taking over neighborhoods, and remember that enemies can't respawn until there's no-one near the spawn point (the only spawns that can are in the starter zones, like the Hellion Lieutenants around the lake in AP), there's nothing left for others unless all of the street sweepers pack up and leave.

 

Yes, that the same code used in the starter zones can be applied universally.  That would resolve that problem, but introduce the problem of players just parking in an optimal spawn point and putting an AoE/PBAoE on auto.  And it would be even faster, since they wouldn't be wasting part of that 15 seconds moving on to another spawn to hit the 4 minions per minute quota.  10 minions served up every 60 seconds, courtesy of the server.  Since they're being fed their minions, there'd be no incentive for players to roll on, so players trying to complete street sweeps for missions would find it even more difficult to locate un-owned spawns.

 

42 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

I don't think there's enough players to support that kind of issue.

 

https://massivelyop.com/2024/03/07/over-42000-people-played-city-of-heroes-homecoming-in-the-last-month/

 

51 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

Over time players would spread out to whichever zone they were leveled to (as encouraged by the proposed auto-party mechanics) and I believe that would ensure enough dispersal that it wouldn't be an issue. Perhaps disable this behavior at level 50, or re-enable the malefactor/exemplar system for level 50s and bring them to the average level of each neighborhood?

 

So, over time, every neighborhood would be full, or full enough to make finding specific enemy groups in specific areas troublesome.  That's not sounding like an improvement to me.

 

35 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

Are there specific missions you had in mind that target rare mobs? I was only aware of the kind that are like "defeat 8 hellions" or "defeat 8 Crey units". But if they were more specific, like "defeat 8 embalmed Vahzilok corpses" or "defeat 8 Clockwork Tesla Knights" then perhaps that would be a bigger concern than I'm expecting.

 

Synapse, Citadel, Manticore, Numina TFs.  Numerous story arcs in the 20's, 30's and 40's which require defeating 10-40 Council, Crey, Nemesis, Freakshow, etc. (there's at least one story arc which has three street sweeps in a row)  Random "Do this before you can unlock my story arc" missions which require street sweeps (50 Carnies or 50 Malta from contacts in PI, both very time-consuming because both groups spawn comparatively infrequently and typically only in smaller numbers).

 

Go do a Numina TF.  How much more "fun" it would be if all 16 of the street sweeps itook significantly longer due to other players clearing out all of the spawns you needed to hit?  It's already unpopular because of all of the street sweeping, I can't imagine this having a positive effect on it.

 

 

Those are the the problems I foresee with this.  Without draconian restrictions, it's obscenely abusable, and it would make certain TFs, story arcs and missions much more difficult, or all but impossible, to complete unless the player "got lucky" or logged in at a time when most players were asleep.  With those restrictions, it's horrendously punitive for anyone who isn't in a neighborhood with the zone capped, reducing their XP to 1% of what they should be receiving per current standards, and since there's no inf*, it's not even as worthwhile as participating in any other content in the game.

 

You also don't address drops, which presumably would either go the way of inf* (making the whole idea even less appealing), be subject to the same drastic nerf as XP (basically shoving an ICBM up the ass of anyone who wasn't in a neighborhood with the zone capped), or unchanged from the current rules (good luck finding anything on the market for less than the equivalent price in reward merits).

[gabrilend]

@Luminara You raise some good points, and I'd like to address them one-by-one because I believe the issues you raise may be ameliorated with some strategic design decisions.

 

1 hour ago, Luminara said:

Quote

I believe this will encourage players to fight in the overworld, and if AFKers are a concern then perhaps make it so that after 2 minutes of inactivity you stop gaining this type of EXP until you engage with an opponent again.

 

I think this would be construed as a direct assault on farming unless the restriction were specific to open-world content.  And if it was set up that way, it wouldn't act as encouragement to participate in open-world content, as it offers nothing to make it more desirable than, or even equally desirable to, TFs, Trials, raids, scanner/newspaper missions, tips, or even plain old story arcs.  It isn't even comparably rewarding for people who just want to street sweep, since they can street sweep now and gain inf* in addition to XP.

 

The intention is neither to assault farming nor to make street sweeping more desirable to (or even equally desirable to) TFs, trials, raids, radio/newspaper missions, tips, or contact missions. The purpose is to breathe life into a form of content that is functionally inert, but has quite a bit of development time spent on it by the original developers. Essentially adding a new way to play the game that already exists, without altering the *optimal* way to play. The goal, I believe, is to appeal to people who are more motivated by the "fun" or the "fantasy" of the game, without altering the playstyles of people who are interested in more optimal, profitable, or beneficial gameplay styles. In addition, I believe it would encourage people to spend time outside Atlas Park, as they'd be able to actively play the game in a social way without having to spend effort organizing a team.

 

1 hour ago, Luminara said:

In fact, for anything other than power-leveling, it's pointless, and for power-leveling, it's over the top.  Let's take 100 level 25 characters into Talos and have everyone defeat one minion (96 XP at level 25).  Everyone in the neighborhood would receive 96 * 100 = 9600 XP.  If they do that four times per minute, 9600 * 4 = 38,400 XP per minute.  In just over 2 minutes, everyone's level 26 (85,200 XP to go from 25 to 26).

 

At level 49, a minion is worth 2464 XP.  2464 * 100 = 246,400.  246,400 * 4 = 985,600 XP per minute.  That's almost exactly 5 minutes from level 49 to level 50.

 

Rough estimation: somewhere between 3 and 4 hours to hit level 50, doing nothing but beating down minion every 15 seconds.  No bosses, not even lieutenants, just minions, and not taking 2x XP or Patrol XP into account.  Start tossing in those variables and you have players lazily cruising to 50 in about 90 minutes, and the only reason it would take that long is because they'd have to move once in a while.

 

I can't see any developer with any sense allowing that, so it'd likely have a massive XP penalty attached to keep it in check.  So now what's the point?  The XP rate would be crippled so it wasn't any better than any other option, it offers nothing else in the way of rewards... and, what, people jump at the chance to do it, and get a warm, fuzzy feeling about being shafted because they're being shafted amongst company?

 

You're absolutely right, those numbers are absurd. I believe that the EXP should be *shared* equally amongst all players present in a neighborhood, not duplicated.

 

So, as an example, let's take your 100 level 25 characters in Talos example. Everyone defeats one minion which gives 96 exp, and since there's 100 players in one neighborhood (where are they all going to stand, by the way? 100 is a massive amount of players, I've never seen more than like, 20 in an entire zone, much less a neighborhood) since there's 100 players receiving EXP, they each would get about 0.96 exp, as the 96 exp from the mob is distributed equally.

 

If that doesn't feel rewarding to the player doing the fighting, then perhaps the EXP gained is split in two, with one portion given to the player doing the fighting and the other half being given to the rest of the neighborhood. This would encourage players to fight (as they'd get the largest portion of damage dealt) while also spreading the benefit to everyone else as well.

 

However, this disadvantages support characters, but I believe the auto-team mechanic should fix that - support characters would be encouraged to hang out with the players in their team, and as such any EXP their teammates gain while nearby would be distributed to them as well. I drew a graphic to illustrate, see attached picture:

 

 

Quote

5 hours ago, gabrilend said:

Also, the current open-world missions aren't too difficult to complete. If there are enemy types in a particular area, there's typically enough around for you to be able to find the kind that you'd need.

 

They're not difficult to complete now.  If players start taking over neighborhoods, and remember that enemies can't respawn until there's no-one near the spawn point (the only spawns that can are in the starter zones, like the Hellion Lieutenants around the lake in AP), there's nothing left for others unless all of the street sweepers pack up and leave.

 

Yes, that the same code used in the starter zones can be applied universally.  That would resolve that problem, but introduce the problem of players just parking in an optimal spawn point and putting an AoE/PBAoE on auto.  And it would be even faster, since they wouldn't be wasting part of that 15 seconds moving on to another spawn to hit the 4 minions per minute quota.  10 minions served up every 60 seconds, courtesy of the server.  Since they're being fed their minions, there'd be no incentive for players to roll on, so players trying to complete street sweeps for missions would find it even more difficult to locate un-owned spawns.

 

I don't believe it would be a good idea to apply the starter zone spawning mechanics to everywhere. In fact I don't even like it in the starting zones, it makes the world feel less "real"

 

However, those design decisions were implemented in order to counteract a specific undesired effect - namely, the early zones would be too crowded and there wouldn't be anyone to fight.

 

Therefore, a possible solution might be to reduce the distance needed between a player and a spawn-point that is attempting to spawn units depending on how many players are in the neighborhood (or zone, if that's easier to implement). This would allow for a scaling increase to the spawn rate as the number of players present increased. I believe that would address this particular concern without allowing for players to simply park their Mastermind on-top of a spawn point and make a sandwich / walk the dog.

 

In fact, now that I think of it, I believe this would be a necessary change in order to implement the proposed idea. Otherwise, when players fan out they'd stifle the spawning of enemies in the zone such that there'd be nobody to fight. That is undesired behavior, however the alteration to the spawning rates I suggested should compensate for that issue I believe.

 

1 hour ago, Luminara said:

So, over time, every neighborhood would be full, or full enough to make finding specific enemy groups in specific areas troublesome.  That's not sounding like an improvement to me.

 

Synapse, Citadel, Manticore, Numina TFs.  Numerous story arcs in the 20's, 30's and 40's which require defeating 10-40 Council, Crey, Nemesis, Freakshow, etc. (there's at least one story arc which has three street sweeps in a row)  Random "Do this before you can unlock my story arc" missions which require street sweeps (50 Carnies or 50 Malta from contacts in PI, both very time-consuming because both groups spawn comparatively infrequently and typically only in smaller numbers).

 

I see your point. Maybe the credit for those specific rare unit types could be shared amongst others who aren't on your team? I kinda figured that's how it functioned already, honestly. I think there are solutions to this issue.

 

1 hour ago, Luminara said:

Those are the the problems I foresee with this.  Without draconian restrictions, it's obscenely abusable, and it would make certain TFs, story arcs and missions much more difficult, or all but impossible, to complete unless the player "got lucky" or logged in at a time when most players were asleep.  With those restrictions, it's horrendously punitive for anyone who isn't in a neighborhood with the zone capped, reducing their XP to 1% of what they should be receiving per current standards, and since there's no inf*, it's not even as worthwhile as participating in any other content in the game.

 

You also don't address drops, which presumably would either go the way of inf* (making the whole idea even less appealing), be subject to the same drastic nerf as XP (basically shoving an ICBM up the ass of anyone who wasn't in a neighborhood with the zone capped), or unchanged from the current rules (good luck finding anything on the market for less than the equivalent price in reward merits).

 

If it appears to be impossible to implement without being abused, I don't think it should be implemented. However, I think there are ways to curtail abuse without stifling the enjoyment of players who want to engage with the game in this way.

 

First it should be ensured that players cannot AFK while mobs throw themselves at them.

 

In addition AFK players should not receive distributed EXP - they should still get EXP from teammates that are fighting nearby, as they currently do, however they shouldn't be able to contribute nothing and still learn from the experience. You can't get stronger without doing pushups, after all.

 

Quote

With those restrictions, it's horrendously punitive for anyone who isn't in a neighborhood with the zone capped, reducing their XP to 1% of what they should be receiving per current standards, and since there's no inf*, it's not even as worthwhile as participating in any other content in the game.

 

Can you explain this part a bit more? What do you mean by "zone capped", do you mean "at the high end of the level range for the zone"? And what do you mean about not earning any infamy/influence? The EXP may be distributed amongst players in the neighborhood, but the infamy gain is kept as-is. You should not be able to claim credit for something you didn't directly contribute to.

 

Also, I'm not sure about the drops. I don't engage with that side of the game very much so I'm open to suggestions about how to address the concerns you have. Can you clarify your concerns about drops so that someone else might be able to think of a solution?

 

Thank you for writing such a long post. I appreciate the conversation 🥰

 

 

Edited April 20 by gabrilend
Fixed a quote's formatting

[Luminara]

5 hours ago, gabrilend said:

So, as an example, let's take your 100 level 25 characters in Talos example. Everyone defeats one minion which gives 96 exp, and since there's 100 players in one neighborhood (where are they all going to stand, by the way? 100 is a massive amount of players, I've never seen more than like, 20 in an entire zone, much less a neighborhood) since there's 100 players receiving EXP, they each would get about 0.96 exp, as the 96 exp from the mob is distributed equally.

 

That should currently be possible with leagues.  The minimum distance requirement (100 yards) to receive rewards is still there, but that's a sizeable area in which to pack characters, and there are a lot of places in the game where spawn locations are dense enough to permit everyone to fight without overlapping.  The rewards are also better than what you've proposed (inf*, drops, higher XP).

 

6 hours ago, gabrilend said:

a possible solution might be to reduce the distance needed between a player and a spawn-point that is attempting to spawn units depending on how many players are in the neighborhood (or zone, if that's easier to implement). This would allow for a scaling increase to the spawn rate as the number of players present increased. I believe that would address this particular concern without allowing for players to simply park their Mastermind on-top of a spawn point and make a sandwich / walk the dog.

 

In fact, now that I think of it, I believe this would be a necessary change in order to implement the proposed idea. Otherwise, when players fan out they'd stifle the spawning of enemies in the zone such that there'd be nobody to fight. That is undesired behavior, however the alteration to the spawning rates I suggested should compensate for that issue I believe.

 

That reintroduces the problem of players who aren't participating in the activity having greater difficulty traversing the location.  Larger spawns in their path between points A and B, spawns appropriate for hazard zones, popping in unexpectedly, not giving players time to maneuver around them.  2004 Hollows.  The death run to the Icon in Steel Canyon.  Debt Express.  Not fun times.

 

7 hours ago, gabrilend said:

Maybe the credit for those specific rare unit types could be shared amongst others who aren't on your team?

 

Then there's no point to those missions.  If all a player has to do is wait for passersby to do the work, there's no reason for the missions to exist at all.  Those "Defeat X Carnies" missions have a purpose, are in the game to give players something to do.  Those "Defeat X Council" missions in the middle of story arcs or TFs are there as part of the story.  Change the system so anyone defeating those enemies counts for the mission or story arc or TF, and they're no longer relevant, and while some of them might be excessive (Numina, again), it would better to redesign the content than to implement a change which turns them into "go to Zone X, stand in Y for 10 seconds" missions.

 

It would also be horrendously confusing for players who didn't understand that the reason one street sweep mission automatically completed was because someone else was street sweeping in the same neighborhood, but another mission is just sitting there, the counter not moving, because no-one else is out there.

 

7 hours ago, gabrilend said:

I kinda figured that's how it functioned already, honestly.

 

No.  If you're not actively engaged with a nearby enemy, not teamed with someone who is, or not in a league with someone who is, the only thing you get is a notification in the chat window.  No kill credit, no XP, no inf*, no drops, no badges, nothing.  That's one of the fundamental design principles of this game.  All rewards are dependent on participation, and simply being in the general area when other players are active isn't participation.

 

7 hours ago, gabrilend said:

First it should be ensured that players cannot AFK while mobs throw themselves at them.

 

You can set up macros (computer macros, not game macros) with any halfway decent keyboard or mouse software, and even low-end input devices come with that kind of software these days.  It's bundled with the drivers.  And for those with bottom shelf crap that's just doing basic input, there's freeware that does this.  And the game can't distinguish between a person pressing a key/button and a computer sending keyboard/mouse input to the game via macros.

 

It's impossible to create any anti-AFK measure that a simple macro program can't defeat because it's impossible for the game to distinguish between macro input and manual input.

 

8 hours ago, gabrilend said:

Can you explain this part a bit more? What do you mean by "zone capped

 

There are population caps on zones.  When a zone is population-capped, a new instance of the zone is created.  Atlas Park 2, Rikti War Zone 3, etc.  Players attempting to enter a capped zone are given the choice of another instance of the zone, or waiting and continuing to try to get into the capped instance.  Zones with specific events which draw large numbers of players together in a tightly comparatively constrained space have lower caps (The Hive, The Abyss, RIkti War Zone) to prevent crashes and severe performance issues.

 

8 hours ago, gabrilend said:

And what do you mean about not earning any infamy/influence? The EXP may be distributed amongst players in the neighborhood, but the infamy gain is kept as-is.

 

Let's take a theoretical character, Shumkunkle, and throw him out in the wild streets of one of the cities.  He's in one of these neighborhoods with XP distribution.  With the amendments you've included, he's facing hazard zone-sized spawns which pop much more quickly than normal, grinding for a miniscule XP bonus, if there's a bonus at all after the restrictions have been factored in, facing greater risk of defeat, receiving zero additional rewards and has to worry about someone else horning in on "his" turf, or keeping his end of the XP train moving forward for everyone else.  Does he have incentive to team?  Maybe, but since he can team and do any other content which offers better rewards, he's not actually incentivized to team for this content.

 

As I noted at the beginning of this post, players can already set up a league and go street sweeping... but no-one's doing that.  No-one.  That's why you started this thread, because no-one is doing it.  And while there are a variety of underlying factors, such as comparatively few players being comfortable leading, league management being a headache, and bugginess with leagues, a major problem is lack of incentive.  It's just not worth it now, when players can go do other things and receive much better rewards, so why would they do it for a tiny bump in XP and nothing else?

 

That's what I mean.  Restricting the distribution system enough to ensure it was balanced would still leave it below all other activities, even below what's currently possible now, but it would have to be restricted to prevent it from being abused.  They can't give merits for street sweeping, they certainly can't give merits for watching others street sweep, there's no chance for special drops, no extra inf*, no badges, no HOs, no Empyrean merits, just a lot of work for an XP gain that's not even comparable to any other teamed activity, or solo activity for players who can build decent characters.

 

If you want players to engage with open-world content, they need incentive that makes it at least as worthwhile as other content.  Like a badge for clearing all of the spawns in a neighborhood, one for each neighborhood, and an accolade for clearing all of the neighborhoods in a zone.  20 years ago, one team, not even a full team, could accomplish that by dumpster diving, but with aggro limts and AoE limits and spawn leashes we have now, it would take a league to clear an entire neighborhood, two in the larger neighborhoods, and it would be worthy of a reward.  A +1 to the Long Range Teleporter so players could use it an extra time before the recharge kicked in, for every zone which they've earned the corresponding accolade.  Or a zone-appropriate NPC non-combat follower, a groupie who's hanging with you because he/she's impressed or grateful.  Or a 50% discount at all of the stores in that neighborhood.  Something to excite the player's interest, to encourage the player to participate.  A badge would be incentive enough for some people, but an XP distribution system that offers less than standard play in every other aspect of the game?  That's going to be wasted code.

 

10 hours ago, gabrilend said:

Also, I'm not sure about the drops. I don't engage with that side of the game very much

 

Empty your salvage and recipes.  Play solo for an hour.  Tabulate the net value of the salvage and recipes you received, using their vendor value (for things you'd just sell at a vendor) or the average of the last 5 sales for the stuff you'd sell on the market.

 

Let's say you net 5,000,000 inf*, to make it easy.

 

Now multiply that total by 100.

 

That'd be why drops would have excluded from the distributed rewards.  Even in league play, drops are determined within teams, not league-wide.  No-one's getting 48 rolls on drop tables at Hami raids or MSRs, they're definitely not going to allow it in your hypothetical distribution system.  The economy would be ruined in less than day.

[lemming]

34 minutes ago, Luminara said:

That should currently be possible with leagues. 

I would prefer this to be the opt in for anything like this being implemented if ever.   Though we should make leagues share XP equally first since it's still based on teams at present.

[gabrilend]

1 hour ago, lemming said:

I would prefer this to be the opt in for anything like this being implemented if ever.   Though we should make leagues share XP equally first since it's still based on teams at present.

 

Unfortunately this isn't a solution to the ideas as presented. I'll explain why in my response to Luminara's post.

 

2 hours ago, Luminara said:

Quote

So, as an example, let's take your 100 level 25 characters in Talos example. Everyone defeats one minion which gives 96 exp, and since there's 100 players in one neighborhood (where are they all going to stand, by the way? 100 is a massive amount of players, I've never seen more than like, 20 in an entire zone, much less a neighborhood) since there's 100 players receiving EXP, they each would get about 0.96 exp, as the 96 exp from the mob is distributed equally.

That should currently be possible with leagues.  The minimum distance requirement (100 yards) to receive rewards is still there, but that's a sizeable area in which to pack characters, and there are a lot of places in the game where spawn locations are dense enough to permit everyone to fight without overlapping.  The rewards are also better than what you've proposed (inf*, drops, higher XP).

 

I don't believe Leagues are the solution. They provide a significant amount of friction that is one of the many reasons why people don't form street sweeping teams today, and in addition the EXP they distribute is not limited to the neighborhood, which is important because not only is a neighborhood much larger than 100 yards, meaning players could spread out significantly more, but also they are not automatic. Someone needs to take care of recruiting and organizing the team/league, and that's too much to ask for something that should be a natural state for player characters to find themselves in. Thematically, I mean.

 

Say you're a hero named Shumkunkle wandering Paragon looking for trouble. You see another hero fighting, so you drop in and help them. You both learn from the experience, and you go your separate ways.

 

With leagues being the solution to this problem, you'd have to invite them to a team or receive diminished rewards. And besides, if you're on one end of the neighborhood fighting Skulls and there's another hero on the other end doing the same, with leagues there's a significant chance that you would have no idea the other was there. Meaning you're less likely to team up, which is precisely the purpose of this suggestion.

 

Thematically, doesn't it make sense for heroes to move on once they've "cleared" an area of foes? And thematically, doesn't it make sense that Shumkunkle and that other hero on the other side of the neighborhood would both be working toward the same goal of "clearing" the area of baddies? I think by sharing the experience they gain, thematically it could be said that they're both contributing toward their common goal - making the city safer for the people who live in it. And as such, once the area is sufficiently "safe" -> as in, the player has outleveled the area, then they should move on to the next place.

 

With leagues, it creates an *explicit* contract between heroes / villains to fight alongside one another. With the EXP distribution per neighborhood idea, the contract is *implicit* and automatic.

 

2 hours ago, Luminara said:

Quote

a possible solution might be to reduce the distance needed between a player and a spawn-point that is attempting to spawn units depending on how many players are in the neighborhood

That reintroduces the problem of players who aren't participating in the activity having greater difficulty traversing the location.  Larger spawns in their path between points A and B, spawns appropriate for hazard zones, popping in unexpectedly, not giving players time to maneuver around them.  2004 Hollows.  The death run to the Icon in Steel Canyon.  Debt Express.  Not fun times.

 

I never said the spawns should be larger. In fact I think they should be the same size, to facilitate spreading out and dispersing through the neighborhood without fear of dying.

 

And if popping in unexpectedly is a concern, which I do believe it is, then make the minimum distance to spawn units be the same as the aggro distance. Or even reduce the aggro distance if there are a significant amount of players in the neighborhood.

 

I actually liked 2004 Hollows, though I didn't start playing until 2006 if I remember correctly.

 

2 hours ago, Luminara said:

Quote

Maybe the credit for those specific rare unit types could be shared amongst others who aren't on your team?

 

EDIT: in relation to open world "kill X amount of Y type of monsters" missions

Then there's no point to those missions.  If all a player has to do is wait for passersby to do the work, there's no reason for the missions to exist at all.  Those "Defeat X Carnies" missions have a purpose, are in the game to give players something to do.  Those "Defeat X Council" missions in the middle of story arcs or TFs are there as part of the story.  Change the system so anyone defeating those enemies counts for the mission or story arc or TF, and they're no longer relevant, and while some of them might be excessive (Numina, again), it would better to redesign the content than to implement a change which turns them into "go to Zone X, stand in Y for 10 seconds" missions.

 

It would also be horrendously confusing for players who didn't understand that the reason one street sweep mission automatically completed was because someone else was street sweeping in the same neighborhood, but another mission is just sitting there, the counter not moving, because no-one else is out there.

 

Yes, that's true, which is why I originally didn't suggest that. I personally think the current behavior for those missions is fine, but you seemed to have an issue with that so I offered a solution. It seems to me that you're correct in saying that this solution is not a good one, so I don't believe any changes should be necessary.

 

To be clear: currently, if you have an open-world kill quest and you see someone else kill that type of monster, then you don't get credit. I believe this behavior should be unaltered. Your original concern was this:

 

Quote

So, over time, every neighborhood would be full, or full enough to make finding specific enemy groups in specific areas troublesome.  That's not sounding like an improvement to me.

 

Synapse, Citadel, Manticore, Numina TFs.  Numerous story arcs in the 20's, 30's and 40's which require defeating 10-40 Council, Crey, Nemesis, Freakshow, etc. (there's at least one story arc which has three street sweeps in a row)  Random "Do this before you can unlock my story arc" missions which require street sweeps (50 Carnies or 50 Malta from contacts in PI, both very time-consuming because both groups spawn comparatively infrequently and typically only in smaller numbers).

 

I believe that this issue would not end up being that big of a deal. Not only would you automatically be put into a group who could help you fight those mobs if you're solo, but also if the zone is "full enough to be troublesome" then the spawn rates would be increased to compensate. I think this would be an issue, but a relatively minor one, especially considering how rare those missions are.

 

2 hours ago, Luminara said:

Quote

I see your point. Maybe the credit for those specific rare unit types could be shared amongst others who aren't on your team?

...

I kinda figured that's how it functioned already, honestly.

No.  If you're not actively engaged with a nearby enemy, not teamed with someone who is, or not in a league with someone who is, the only thing you get is a notification in the chat window.  No kill credit, no XP, no inf*, no drops, no badges, nothing.  That's one of the fundamental design principles of this game.  All rewards are dependent on participation, and simply being in the general area when other players are active isn't participation.

 

That makes sense to me. However I would like to point out that farm sitters are a pretty explicit example of the kind of behavior you're arguing against here, and to be even more generic all you have to do is be on a team while someone else fights baddies around you and you'll get rewarded without participating.

 

Quote

Empty your salvage and recipes.  Play solo for an hour.  Tabulate the net value of the salvage and recipes you received, using their vendor value (for things you'd just sell at a vendor) or the average of the last 5 sales for the stuff you'd sell on the market.

 

Let's say you net 5,000,000 inf*, to make it easy.

 

Now multiply that total by 100.

 

That'd be why drops would have excluded from the distributed rewards.  Even in league play, drops are determined within teams, not league-wide.  No-one's getting 48 rolls on drop tables at Hami raids or MSRs, they're definitely not going to allow it in your hypothetical distribution system.  The economy would be ruined in less than day.

 

I see. Well, the proposed system only suggests an alteration to EXP distribution. As far as I can tell, the economy should remain relatively unaffected.

 

Also, 5 million infamy for an hour playing is a massive amount of dosh, though I guess my perspective is a little warped because I've never gotten a character to 50 teehee

 

2 hours ago, Luminara said:

Quote

First it should be ensured that players cannot AFK while mobs throw themselves at them.

You can set up macros (computer macros, not game macros) with any halfway decent keyboard or mouse software, and even low-end input devices come with that kind of software these days.  It's bundled with the drivers.  And for those with bottom shelf crap that's just doing basic input, there's freeware that does this.  And the game can't distinguish between a person pressing a key/button and a computer sending keyboard/mouse input to the game via macros.

 

It's impossible to create any anti-AFK measure that a simple macro program can't defeat because it's impossible for the game to distinguish between macro input and manual input.

 

The type of AFK detection I'm advocating for is pretty simple, basically if a player hasn't defeated a monster in the past minute then they don't get distributed EXP rewards. That's pretty much it. I'll explain how I'd implement the architecture:

 

Whenever a player enters a zone, they get added to a list. When they leave, they are removed from that list.

This list iterates through all the players in the zone one step per second (or other interval as determined by the capabilities of the server and the number of players in the zone).

It checks the timestamp for when the player last defeated an enemy, and if it's greater than 1 minute then a boolean is flipped on their character's record in the list. This boolean is used to determine which heroes to distribute EXP rewards to. Next time they defeat a foe, the boolean flips back (or perhaps the next time the list iteration rolls past them).

 

I believe this is a simple enough solution that should handle most AFK issues. Combined with the limitation that mobs cannot spawn at a certain spawn point while a player or their minions are within the aggro radius (both of the mob and the "aggressive" pet aggro distance) I think that AFKers should be mostly defeated. What do you think? Am I missing any situations that might apply?

 

And just to clarify, this limitation only applies to the NEW source of exp distribution. The default means of acquiring EXP, perhaps from your friends fighting things nearby for you, should still be in effect. Albeit at a reduced rate, as 50% of their EXP is being distributed to the neighborhood...

 

3 hours ago, Luminara said:

There are population caps on zones.  When a zone is population-capped, a new instance of the zone is created.  Atlas Park 2, Rikti War Zone 3, etc.  Players attempting to enter a capped zone are given the choice of another instance of the zone, or waiting and continuing to try to get into the capped instance.  Zones with specific events which draw large numbers of players together in a tightly comparatively constrained space have lower caps (The Hive, The Abyss, RIkti War Zone) to prevent crashes and severe performance issues.

 

Thanks for explaining the zone capped mechanics. I've seen that before so I'm familiar, I just didn't recognize that name for it.

 

3 hours ago, Luminara said:

Let's take a theoretical character, Shumkunkle, and throw him out in the wild streets of one of the cities.  He's in one of these neighborhoods with XP distribution.  With the amendments you've included, he's facing hazard zone-sized spawns which pop much more quickly than normal, grinding for a miniscule XP bonus, if there's a bonus at all after the restrictions have been factored in, facing greater risk of defeat, receiving zero additional rewards and has to worry about someone else horning in on "his" turf, or keeping his end of the XP train moving forward for everyone else.  Does he have incentive to team?  Maybe, but since he can team and do any other content which offers better rewards, he's not actually incentivized to team for this content.

 

I never said they should be hazard zone sized spawns, but I already clarified that earlier in this comment.

 

If this player is the only one in the neighborhood, then perhaps the EXP would be reduced compared the current implementation of street sweeping. But like you go on to say later, NO-ONE is street sweeping, so perhaps that's not such a bad thing, especially considering that this idea would provide structure for street-sweeping groups to actually organize through. I believe we can implement the kinds of rewards that would motivate players to engage with this kind of content, see for example this idea that I had when talking with @McSpazz:

 

Quote

Quote

The first is that I feel like before this can be made into a satisfying and fun experience, zones themselves first need to be improved. Specifically related to enemy placement and a sense of a zone having purpose. If you look at the zones released or modified towards the end of the game's lifespan and compare it to its older maps, you can see what I mean, but I think a more direct comparison between Echo: Atlas and modern Atlas can paint a more stark picture. In the modern iteration, it doesn't feel like enemies are literally in control of the city and ruling the streets. Different parts of the city have different issues that need to be addressed. Older maps in Paragon and to a somewhat lesser extent in the Rogue Isles, the zones feel far more like spaces for you to move through between missions with enemies peppered throughout. Newer zones also have something that would be vital to making this feel at all rewarding: something the street sweeping is building up to. Something akin to Homecoming changing things so that Scrapyarder defeats can spawn Scrapyard. Each zone where you implemented zonewide shared exp would need something like that to justify people doing this rather than just running through a mission and getting an immediate burst of feedback.

I think this is absolutely a wonderful idea. Having an increased threat monster arise due to the presence of heroes, or maybe an archvillain shows up to stomp on all the lesser villains, something to that effect.

 

Perhaps there's a hidden counter or meter that fills up as players fight monsters in the zone, and when a certain amount have been defeated a hero/archvillain is spawned that is thematically appropriate for that level range. That's a decent reward, but I believe it's a little similar to the Giant Monster mechanic. Perhaps an additional twist is necessary...!

 

What if this archvillain/hero that spawns is of the opposite alignment to the zone. So, for example, if you're in Paragon City, an archvillain would spawn who was hostile to the players *and* the normal enemies present. So a neighborhood in Atlas Park for example which is mostly populated by Hellions would have an archvillain spawn who was drawn to the fighting for some reason and wanders around much like a player does fighting both heroes and Hellions. I believe that would encourage players to fight them, because not only would they be worth a lot of exp and infamy/influence, they also would be reducing the potential targets for their street sweeping patrol.

 

There's currently already a large group of NPC costumes created for the bank heist missions. Perhaps after (100 * number of players in zone) enemy units are slain / arrested / beaten down, it spawns a hero/archvillain in a random neighborhood? Ideally, without any proclamation or explanation of their presence. That way players would have to hunt them down.

 

Basically mirroring the players and using the same behavior they're using, but for the opposite side.

 

Perhaps when defeating these archvillains/heroes, you're given a reward merit? Would that be sufficient reward / motivation to engage with this kind of content, for the reward-oriented players in our midst?

 

Quote

As I noted at the beginning of this post, players can already set up a league and go street sweeping... but no-one's doing that.  No-one.  That's why you started this thread, because no-one is doing it.  And while there are a variety of underlying factors, such as comparatively few players being comfortable leading, league management being a headache, and bugginess with leagues, a major problem is lack of incentive.  It's just not worth it now, when players can go do other things and receive much better rewards, so why would they do it for a tiny bump in XP and nothing else?

 

That's what I mean.  Restricting the distribution system enough to ensure it was balanced would still leave it below all other activities, even below what's currently possible now, but it would have to be restricted to prevent it from being abused.  They can't give merits for street sweeping, they certainly can't give merits for watching others street sweep, there's no chance for special drops, no extra inf*, no badges, no HOs, no Empyrean merits, just a lot of work for an XP gain that's not even comparable to any other teamed activity, or solo activity for players who can build decent characters.

 

If you want players to engage with open-world content, they need incentive that makes it at least as worthwhile as other content.  Like a badge for clearing all of the spawns in a neighborhood, one for each neighborhood, and an accolade for clearing all of the neighborhoods in a zone.  20 years ago, one team, not even a full team, could accomplish that by dumpster diving, but with aggro limts and AoE limits and spawn leashes we have now, it would take a league to clear an entire neighborhood, two in the larger neighborhoods, and it would be worthy of a reward.  A +1 to the Long Range Teleporter so players could use it an extra time before the recharge kicked in, for every zone which they've earned the corresponding accolade.  Or a zone-appropriate NPC non-combat follower, a groupie who's hanging with you because he/she's impressed or grateful.  Or a 50% discount at all of the stores in that neighborhood.  Something to excite the player's interest, to encourage the player to participate.  A badge would be incentive enough for some people, but an XP distribution system that offers less than standard play in every other aspect of the game?  That's going to be wasted code.

 

So, if "restricting the distribution system enough to ensure it was balanced would leave it below all other activities", and "no-one is forming these types of teams because of a lack of incentive", then... why not give reward merits for street sweeping? You say they can't, but... why not? Specifically, if a reward merit was given for defeating the archvillains / heroes that pop up. Not giant monster level threats, just one step above boss minions. Would that be an adequate reward?

 

You go on to express some ideas for more unique rewards, but... I don't really like that kind of idea. It feels too separate from the activity itself, like offering cosmetic rewards for achievements or something. Ideally, this type of content would have the same type of rewards as other types of content, allowing it to be an alternative to running the same missions and tasks forces and such over and over and over again...

 

And that brings me to the primary motivation behind implementing gameplay mechanics that encourage street sweeping. There's a massive amount of environments in the game that are just... inert, because there's no reason to engage with them. People say that it's difficult to add new powersets because developing assets is hard and that it's hard to create new costume pieces because making 3d models is hard, and when I hear that I can't help but think of the content that already exists in the game that could be utilized for a massive bump in content for players to engage with. All that it would need is some mechanical systems that organize players to engage with the open world.

 

I believe that street sweeping (should it be adequately compensated and correctly designed to bring players together) is fundamentally a more engaging experience than running missions all day. Wouldn't you rather be out under the open sky than in a cramped warehouse or office building? Especially one that you've seen a hundred times... Wouldn't you rather there were no walls to bind you, save for the ethereal blue ones that appear when you stray too far from land? (engine limitations hehe) - I personally enjoy the feeling of deciding where I'd like to go in the moment. It's never the same place because there's always new places to go. And if you run out of places, then odds are you're about to level out of the area anyway. And if I were to join a street sweeping team like you suggest (I've organized them before) then not only would I be compelled to concentrate on the place where the rest of my team is located due to EXP not being distributed farther than a short distance, but also we'd easily clear the area of any white/yellow enemies, meaning we're compelled to move to areas with orange, red, and purple enemies. This solution does not create the type of behavior and playstyle that I believe the proposed idea would, specifically the ability to disperse throughout a neighborhood (as the EXP would be distributed to your allies) and to fight equal level enemies (because you never know when your friends are going to leave the area/team, meaning you're likely to be stranded in a difficult zone if you punch above your weight class)

 

I believe that implementing this idea using a few new mechanical systems without any additional art assets would allow Homecoming to set itself apart from the other servers even more than it currently is, for minimal effort.

[Troo]

I just want to say I really like the 'essay' tag.

[Snakebit]

 

3 hours ago, Luminara said:

but an XP distribution system that offers less than standard play in every other aspect of the game?  That's going to be wasted code.

 

 

Facts. There was a time when door missions didn't have a bonus, and the downtime with travelling across multiple zones to get to a door mission made street sweeping the preferred method for xp gain. You could get on a team in minutes, but if you wanted to do missions, you'd wait.  The day they patched in end-of-mission rewards, street sweeping died forever. 

 

I could see a mission from a contact that required you to enter an open zone, say Terra Volta. If you zone or leave your team, mission fail. If you stay on the team for the duration of the mission (let's spitball 30m) and defeat the required number of mobs, you get a mission bonus same as a door mission, plus an appropriate amount of patrol xp. Say, a full bubble. Run 10 of these in the same zone, you get a badge. Collect 10 badges like this, get an accolade that grants a buff to your offline patrol xp. 

 

I'd run the hell out of that. 

[gabrilend]

25 minutes ago, Snakebit said:

There was a time when door missions didn't have a bonus, and the downtime with travelling across multiple zones to get to a door mission made street sweeping the preferred method for xp gain. You could get on a team in minutes, but if you wanted to do missions, you'd wait.  The day they patched in end-of-mission rewards, street sweeping died forever.

 

RIP street sweeping, may you live again one day, perhaps due to the proposed system, perhaps in some other way. Alas, your reign was glorious, short as it may be, as the City of Heroes was safer in your presence.

 

26 minutes ago, Snakebit said:

I could see a mission from a contact that required you to enter an open zone, say Terra Volta. If you zone or leave your team, mission fail. If you stay on the team for the duration of the mission (let's spitball 30m) and defeat the required number of mobs, you get a mission bonus same as a door mission, plus an appropriate amount of patrol xp. Say, a full bubble. Run 10 of these in the same zone, you get a badge. Collect 10 badges like this, get an accolade that grants a buff to your offline patrol xp. 

 

I'd run the hell out of that. 

 

That sounds fun. Though I wonder if there'd be any reason to continue doing it after you got that accolade.

[Snakebit]

1 hour ago, gabrilend said:

 

RIP street sweeping, may you live again one day, perhaps due to the proposed system, perhaps in some other way. Alas, your reign was glorious, short as it may be, as the City of Heroes was safer in your presence.

 

 

That sounds fun. Though I wonder if there'd be any reason to continue doing it after you got that accolade.

 

Maybe a tiered accolade, with the biggest benefit being at the lower levels. Say an accolade for 10-20, 20-30, 30-40, 40-50, with a Master of Accolade that gives you a buff to vanguard merits or a click power that gives you a small drop rate buff for an hour with a two hour recharge. But maybe not, maybe just keep a buff to patrol xp since that will net Empyreon Merits faster. 

[Rudra]

2 hours ago, gabrilend said:

 

I don't believe Leagues are the solution. They provide a significant amount of friction that is one of the many reasons why people don't form street sweeping teams today,

I have to disagree. First, because there are street sweep teams. Though the only ones I know of are pursuing specific badges, so they don't really count for this. Second, I would contend that the reason why you don't see street sweeping teams is because street sweeping does not award mission rewards like instanced missions do and because a random person can come by and also attack your target reducing your rewards since they are not part of the team.