|
Title: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Llava on April 11, 2005, 12:04:16 PM Small one first:
Quote Couple of changes we're making in I5: 1) Instead of the first five levels being debt free, the first TEN levels will be debt free. 2) XP debt will be halved on mission maps (that includes outdoor mission maps, too). And then the long one: Quote Let me talk about goals in balance… Originally, we targeted a basic formula. A hero equaled 3 to 4 minions. Or a Lt. and one minion. Or 3/4 of a boss. A hero could fight things one (or more levels) below him with only a slight chance of defeat. A hero could fight things his own level with some chance of defeat; mobs one level higher would be hard, but defeatable. If a foe was two or more levels above the hero, a player would have a relatively high likelihood of defeat. Our entire spawn system in zones and missions depended upon these equations. But then we released the game The system holds up pretty well up until the mid to late twenties, but once players can purchase S.O.’s in the stores, their abilities rapidly outstrip the curve. Enhancements ended up being priced too cheaply (something that we’ll change sometime soon). In order to find something fun to do (i.e. something that had an element of risk), players needed to hunt in zones; missions became boring. We had a choice a while back – the easy way to fix the issue was to increase the difficulty of mobs. But this impacted EVERY Archetype. Some builds, we found, fit into the paradigm quite nicely. Others did not. Increasing the difficulty for them would have had a drastic impact. Instead, we added a difficulty slider. Those Archetypes and builds that could handle tougher foes now could ratchet up their Reputation. Admittedly, this meant that some builds could gain more XP/hr. than others, but we thought this would be the best solution. We wanted to make sure that the fun/risk in a mission could match what a person could find out in the zones. Why? Because we feel that missions are a great part of the game. If a player eschews missions to street sweep, he isn’t seeing all of the great City of Heroes content. The difficulty slider allows a player to raise the difficulty of mobs he faces in missions up to +3 levels. The goal for the level 30+ game is for players to have fun battling those foes. So, if you’re level 40, 3 to 4 +3 level minions should present a challenge. Does this mean a fifty/fifty chance of success? No – it simply means that there’s a chance of defeat. A boss +3 levels should present a significant threat. Certain Archetypes can handle more mobs than this – Tankers, for example, are designed to take on the agro of many mobs at once. Sure, a Tanker can survive tackling 10 or so minions, but his damage rate is relatively slow and he needs the other Archetypes to wipe out the opposition quickly. A few other points. Arch Villains were NEVER designed to be solo-ed. Whenever a hero can defeat an even conned Arch Villain, there’s definitely an issue. We’re also aware of the significant imbalance that Hamidon Enhancements cause in the Arena and we are striving for a solution. I love the "first 10 levels debt free" change. The first 5 levels are about 15 minutes, the next 5 are where characters start running into difficulty while still only having an introductory use of their powers. Would be nice if they could work it into I4, but looks like that's not gonna happen. The XP debt halved on missions is nice too. I'll bet they did some data mining and found that WAY more people die in missions than on the streets, and that's for a few reasons: 1) Retards setting their difficulty to Invincible without warning anyone and jumping into an unbalanced team. 2) Retards setting their difficulty to Invincible below level 22. 3) Archvillain 1-shots. 4) Herding more than you can handle. The balance stuff isn't really anything new, except for the mention of making enhances more expensive. My level 50 has about 30 million influence in the bank... and I've barely played him since he hit 50, so they'd have to make them QUITE a bit more expensive to put a real dent in players' pockets. Hopefully they'll just do this for levels 35 and higher, as I remember having some cash problems getting my initial SOs and keeping them updated for a while. Though maybe their intent is to have players use some DOs in their slots. Hope not, SOs are what really give you that "super" feeling. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: stray on April 11, 2005, 12:27:15 PM Though maybe their intent is to have players use some DOs in their slots. Hope not, SOs are what really give you that "super" feeling. Judging by their previous actions, they'll do everything they can to keep you from having that "super" feeling. Silly rabbit, this is an MMO. Not a superhero game. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: MaceVanHoffen on April 11, 2005, 12:40:01 PM SOs are pretty expensive until your mid-30's or so. I haven't played a single hero that had more than 1 or 2 SOs up until level 28 or so. Making them more expensive just seems wrong. I'm not sure what's broken about the system as is. It seems to me that epic-level heroes need to have other things to spend their influence on, rather than moving SO's out of reach for most players.
I'm also a little worried when Statesman talks about balance. The ability to take on tons of villains is what makes CoH so much fun, and gives it that comicbook feel. It sounds like they're starting to "Everquest" their game, or at least start to have that outlook. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: stray on April 11, 2005, 12:48:24 PM It sounds like they're starting to "Everquest" their game, or at least start to have that outlook. They already moved in that direction in the first month after release. If you had played it before then, you would already be jaded. Like me. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Der Helm on April 11, 2005, 12:52:17 PM The first 5 levels are about 15 minutes Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: schild on April 11, 2005, 01:05:15 PM The first 5 levels are about 15 minutes He's exaggerating. I think I was able to do levels 1-5 in about 52 minutes during beta. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Mesozoic on April 11, 2005, 01:11:38 PM I'm also a little worried when Statesman talks about balance. The ability to take on tons of villains is what makes CoH so much fun, and gives it that comicbook feel. It sounds like they're starting to "Everquest" their game, or at least start to have that outlook. Meh. He's not talking about altering the fundamentals of combat so much as reigning in a few templates that really can't be challenged in missions. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: HaemishM on April 11, 2005, 01:26:16 PM It sounds like they're starting to "Everquest" their game, or at least start to have that outlook. They already moved in that direction in the first month after release. If you had played it before then, you would already be jaded. Like me. Played it since the pre-order beta, still enjoy the hell out of it. I've also played that mostly solo. I do think that making SO's more expensive will not be a good change, and I worry when they talk about balancing difficulty. I think the problem is that street sweeping can be so easy to do for experience, but it totally defeats the entire purpose of playing the game. I've heard of guys who'll just grab up an assload of mobs, run them to the nearest dumpster, jump their hero IN the dumpster and dump assloads of AE stuff outside the dumpster just to level up. WHY? The game is fun, leveling is a side benefit. But I'll never understand that mentality anyway. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: MaceVanHoffen on April 11, 2005, 01:33:04 PM I'm also a little worried when Statesman talks about balance. The ability to take on tons of villains is what makes CoH so much fun, and gives it that comicbook feel. It sounds like they're starting to "Everquest" their game, or at least start to have that outlook. Meh. He's not talking about altering the fundamentals of combat so much as reigning in a few templates that really can't be challenged in missions. Which templates, though? I've only run into one power set that has that level-grind feel: mind control. Other than that, every single hero I've played, well into the 30's, has been able to do things like solo +3 bosses and numerous other things that are supposedly unbalanced. Mind you, I'm not claiming to do these things safely or quickly, merely that they can be done consistently and repeatably. I've got 2 accounts with slots on 2 servers full of heroes that can do these things, and I'm not even a very good player. It's the reason that I keep playing this game, because it doesn't feel like an MMO. I do think he's talking about the fundamentals of combat, because I honestly can't see what AT and power combo (other than the 1 example I mentioned) cannot do the things he's concerned about. By implication, because he hasn't really clarified his thoughts, that means he wants all heroes brought down to where mind control is. Let's just hope that isn't the case. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Triforcer on April 11, 2005, 02:07:35 PM As a somewhat tangentially related side note, I've always thought its a good idea in level based games to artificially adjust mob levels so that you are ALWAYS killing things many levels above you. People feel sad and whine for buffs when their character has a hard time killing something green, and there is a sense of accomplishment when you kill something higher level than you. I vaguely recall the UO2 dev team talking about things like this, I think there was a screenshot of people killing 20 foot tall minotaurs with their starting dagger in the newbie zone.
Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: eldaec on April 11, 2005, 03:13:11 PM As a somewhat tangentially related side note, I've always thought its a good idea in level based games to artificially adjust mob levels so that you are ALWAYS killing things many levels above you. People feel sad and whine for buffs when their character has a hard time killing something green, and there is a sense of accomplishment when you kill something higher level than you. I vaguely recall the UO2 dev team talking about things like this, I think there was a screenshot of people killing 20 foot tall minotaurs with their starting dagger in the newbie zone. I'd much rather adjust so that you are always killing lots of things, no matter what your level. In CoH, the fact that heroes fight realtively organised groups of villians was partly an accident of the design, but it is a very good thing. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Llava on April 11, 2005, 04:31:20 PM It sounds like they're starting to "Everquest" their game, or at least start to have that outlook. They already moved in that direction in the first month after release. If you had played it before then, you would already be jaded. Like me. Been playing since beta, was never jaded towards the dev team. Only reason I stopped playing for about a month was because I just ran out of stuff to do. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: SirBruce on April 12, 2005, 05:52:20 AM Quote A few other points. Arch Villains were NEVER designed to be solo-ed. Whenever a hero can defeat an even conned Arch Villain, there’s definitely an issue. Right. Because Batman never beat the Joker on his own, Spider-Man never defeated the Green Goblin, and Superman could never handle Lex Luthor solo. Oh wait, THEY DID. Sorry, City of Heroes, I still care about you, but we just aren't right for each-other. You can't satisfy my needs. Let's be friends. Bruce Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: schild on April 12, 2005, 08:44:10 AM I wouldn't consider those people arch villains. Particularly not Luthor. As much as I LOOOOOOOOOVE me some Luthor v. Spiderman, for the most part, those two were just arch nemesis, no matter how rich luthor got, he always tried to shove a little kryptonite up Kent's ass.
No SINGLE hero ever beat an arch villain. When that sort of thing is said, they're talking about group comic books. But you already knew that. X-Men, etc. To reiterate: Joker, Green Goblin and Luthor were not arch-villains. They were arch-nemesis. Don't talk to hear yourself speak. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: tazelbain on April 12, 2005, 10:29:28 AM I am hearing a bit of...
If I can't trivialize the content, I don't feel like a hero. Anyway, I am not a big fan of enhancement/inspiration system. Vendors + Inspirations make min/maxing the enhancements a simple task. Why even bother with the system at all? Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Rasix on April 12, 2005, 10:32:32 AM I feel sick. I agree 100% with Bruce.
Everytime I feel the urge to come back and break out "More Cowbell" ( best costume/hero gimmick EVAR!), I just read the newest burb from Statesman. Works like a charm. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Llava on April 12, 2005, 01:23:52 PM I never considered Green Goblin or someone like that an Archvillain.
Magneto is an archvillain, and no one in the X-Men can take him solo (except maybe Xavier, but he's like the goodguy equivalent of an AV). Apocalypse is an archvillain. Doomsday is an archvillain. Someone like The Joker, or the Green Goblin, is at roughly the same power level of an individual hero and, thus, should be considered a boss. Hell, look at Spiderman, Venom and Carnage. Spiderman and Venom are roughly equal, so Spiderman's a hero and Venom's a boss. Carnage, however, is a total beast and it required Spiderman, Venom, Black Cat, and any number of other heroes to bring him down. Carnage is an archvillain. Let's not even get into Monsters. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: ClydeJr on April 12, 2005, 02:09:16 PM Vendors + Inspirations make min/maxing the enhancements a simple task. Why even bother with the system at all? It does allow you do customize your powers somewhat. In my energy blaster, I have a single endurance reducer in each of main attack powers. Most other people would replace the end reducer with a damage enhancement. I would prefer to be able to keep blasting because I don't use as much end. It also makes my downtime less if I'm not grouped with some sort of end recovery power hero. My tanker uses a mace as a weapon which has a side effect of disorienting the enemy. I mostly play him solo so I slot damage in his attack powers. I've heard of another mace tanker who groups a lot and slots disorients in his attack powers. He'll smash one guy, then smash another, then smash another. Now you've got three guys wandering around not doing any damage at all. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: tazelbain on April 12, 2005, 02:56:40 PM Yes, enhancement selection is meaningful for some skills.
My point is you could give everyone free enhancements and not substantially alter the game except to remove some minor headaches. It's not like there is an economy, whats the point? The silly names for the enhancement's add very little in the way of atmosphere. Double or Triple the cost of enhancements, haven't added anything to the game and all you have done is punish the people who didn't get to 50 under the "liberal" inspiration system and create even more incentive to twink. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: eldaec on April 12, 2005, 03:17:10 PM It doesn't really matter what an archvillian is equivalent to as such, what matters is that AVs are intended to be *the most powerful opponent class in the game*.
If it's trivial to take down *the most powerful opponent class in the game* solo then I'm with statesman, things are broken. If you really want to draw direct comic book parallels, it's worth noting that even under Statesmans 'no even-con AV soloing' rule and various balance proposals, noone has ever suggested you can't get your ass handed to you, go back out into the world train up some more, gather some inspirations and enhancers, or some friends, then go back and kick his ass. Exactly like, you know, a comic book hero would. No superhero ever beat any of the villians listed in this thread without getting beaten the first time around. As regards the general hero power levels, enhancement mudflation and better understanding of the game by the playerbase has meant players have done far more than just kept pace with the mobs. CoH is far from perfect, but inability to solo or slow grind would be an insane charge to level at it. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: SirBruce on April 12, 2005, 07:20:21 PM It doesn't really matter what an archvillian is equivalent to as such, what matters is that AVs are intended to be *the most powerful opponent class in the game*. If it's trivial to take down *the most powerful opponent class in the game* solo then I'm with statesman, things are broken. I agree with you there, and you hit on the main issue. However, I would argue you should still be able to solo them, it just simply should not be TRIVIAL to do so. That's the whole point of an adventure, after all. But, the other folks do have a point that there were villians in comic books that generally required a group effort to take down. However, their plots are usually more "End Of The World" type stuff, not blowing up the city dam. And a lot of times they are used in comic books as sort-of maxi-series special events. Such events may have a place in the world of CoH, but your typical arch-villian, you know Dr. Vahzilok and Clockwork King so on, they should be soloable. Quote CoH is far from perfect, but inability to solo or slow grind would be an insane charge to level at it. Inability to solo arch-villians would be an accurate charge to level at it, per The Statesman's own words. Bruce Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: eldaec on April 13, 2005, 01:18:16 AM Quote Inability to solo arch-villians would be an accurate charge to level at it, per The Statesman's own words. Bruce Everyone in CoH can solo archvillians. Not everyone can solo every archvillian. Not everyone can solo every archvillian at every level. Not everyone can solo every archvillian without adjusting enhancements and an assload of inspiration. In this respect arrangements are somewhat like, you know, comic books. Even Statesman has no problem with everyone being able to solo archvillians under certain circumstances. Statesman's view principly concerns at what relative level you should be able to kill the most powerful opponent class in the game without cooperating with other players in a cooperative multiplayer game. As you will be aware, if you have been paying attention, 'even-con' AVs are +5 combat levels. +5 combat levels may be thought of as 'a lot' for those people who aren't aware of CoHs level curve. If you believe that any player should be able to walk up to any opponent in the game and defeat them without having to use the various options the game provides for making your character more powerful (groups, enhancements, inspirations, levels, temporary powers, asking other players what the AV's weakness is) then your comment is valid - but rather silly. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: SirBruce on April 13, 2005, 04:05:59 AM [Everyone in CoH can solo archvillians. Not everyone can solo every archvillian. Not everyone can solo every archvillian at every level. Not everyone can solo every archvillian without adjusting enhancements and an assload of inspiration. In this respect arrangements are somewhat like, you know, comic books. We're talking about design intent per Statesman's words, not what may or may not be currently possible. Even Statesman has no problem with everyone being able to solo archvillians under certain circumstances. That is not how I interpret his statement. I believe if he had meant that, he would have specifically stated it. I will grant that he did specifically state "even con"; however, we're talking about arch-villians that you're going to be combating normally at your level. Now, most comic book heroes don't really "level" the way heroes do in CoH, so it's hard to find a good analogy here. But it does no good to be able to solo an archvillian 10 levels below you since you're unlikely to have missions set against that archvillian. Statesman's view principly concerns at what relative level you should be able to kill the most powerful opponent class in the game without cooperating with other players in a cooperative multiplayer game. No, I think his view primarily concerns a design philosophy, not a specific mechanic. Yes, the issue of fighting higher-level cons in general underlies the issue, but his statement was about his view of the game as it should be. If you believe that any player should be able to walk up to any opponent in the game and defeat them without having to use the various options the game provides for making your character more powerful (groups, enhancements, inspirations, levels, temporary powers, asking other players what the AV's weakness is) then your comment is valid - but rather silly. I believe that any player should be able to walk up to any opponent they are "supposed' to encounter given the missions and areas they are assigned to, and defeat them, with all of the "various options" you listed EXCEPT groups. Any exceptions to this need to be purposefully rare and backed by a very good reason beyond the desire to up the difficulty level. Bruce Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: eldaec on April 13, 2005, 06:16:39 AM That is not how I interpret his statement. Fine. You should read the CoH boards more then. Quote I believe that any player should be able to walk up to any opponent they are "supposed' to encounter given the missions and areas they are assigned to, and defeat them, with all of the "various options" you listed EXCEPT groups. Any exceptions to this need to be purposefully rare and backed by a very good reason beyond the desire to up the difficulty level. Fine. You can do this all the way up to level 46, though for approximately 3 missions in 45 levels you would have to leave and level up before returning. The only reason you can't do it at level 46 - when you start to encounter evil versions of your trainers - is that you can't gain more than 5 more levels. The devs have even taken the remarkable step of removing almost all bosses from missions that only one hero arrives at, just to facilitate that (assuming you have your difficulty set to 'pussy' or whatever they call it these days). Admittedly it is possible, by not paying enough attention, to build a character that cannot do this because you wanted only melee powers on your blaster or some such nonsense. btw, as you will already know AVs are puposefully rare. There are about half a dozen before level 45, and if you solo you are most unlikely to meet more than a couple of them. There are no circumstances in which you are forced to fight them. There are not even any optional accolades that require you to fight them. (as you will be aware, accolades are the badges that have effects beyond optional titles) My scrapper who I mostly soloed has fought one AV by level 40. And that was Terra, who many players consider doesn't really count. My only issue with that encounter was that Terra had no real hope of beating me even if I had gone afk to watch Dr Who or something. Quote Now, most comic book heroes don't really "level" the way heroes do in CoH, so it's hard to find a good analogy here. But it does no good to be able to solo an archvillian 10 levels below you since you're unlikely to have missions set against that archvillian. No, but they do get their ass handed to them in act 2, then come back and prevail in act 3 almsot universally due to one of the following.... 1) Training 2) More powers 3) Gaining allies 4) Better strategy and preparation. Which as far as I can tell look exactly like groups, levels, enhancements, and inspirations. As regards the 10 levels thing, I'm suggesting if you solo it you might need to wait until it's white con, so your combat levels are the same. As you will know having thoroughly researched CoH, an even security level AV is considered +5 combat levels. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: HaemishM on April 13, 2005, 08:35:18 AM To reiterate: Joker, Green Goblin and Luthor were not arch-villains. They were arch-nemesis. Don't talk to hear yourself speak. As someone who actually worked in the comics industry, it is my professional opinion that you're splitting hairs. There's no functional difference between the two. Wow. You worked at a comics store. This is now being called having "worked in the comics industry?" Does that mean my failed attempts to self-publish a comic book mean I can claim to have "worked in the comics industry" too? I need to polish my resume. Dick. The villains mentioned above are not arch-villains in the CoH sense. There is a difference between arch-villains and arch-nemesis. The arch-nemesis, like Luthor or the Joker, have never been real physical challenges for the heroes they are obsessed with. Batman can beat the shit out of the Joker anytime he wished, and Luthor has to get some serious help (armor, kryptonite, etc.) in order to be any kind of actual threat one-on-one. Arch-nemesis type characters typically create a challenge for the hero through pawns, minions, and other things which are not really directly translatable to City of Heroes game play. Things like attacking their civilian identities, or their friends, trying to drive the hero insane, and all sorts of other stuff that isn't really available in CoH. Now, when City of Villains becomes available, some of these things WILL be available, in the form of metagaming, similar to PVP politics and shit from other PVP games. There still won't be any "secret identity" type stuff, though, because that's a meaningless concept in CoH. Archvillains in the CoH sense are more like Gog vs. Superman, or Bane for Batman. Strong-ass motherfuckers who may have some nemesis in them, but are more than a match for the hero one-on-one. Carnage for Spider-Man, or Sinestro/Parallaz for the original Green Lantern. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Llava on April 13, 2005, 11:32:48 AM I will grant that he did specifically state "even con"; however, we're talking about arch-villians that you're going to be combating normally at your level. Now, most comic book heroes don't really "level" the way heroes do in CoH, so it's hard to find a good analogy here. Wha? Don't you remember this? Batman fights Bane, Batman gets owned. (http://www.tcomics.com/showcase/trades/b/batm/knightfall1.jpg) Batman makes Azrael the new Batman, Azrael owns Bane. (http://www.hillcity-comics.com/graphic_novels/bat/knightfall_02.jpg) Batman spends this time training, relearns everything he knows, "levels up" as it were, and then takes on a power-mad Azrael. (http://www.starstore.com/acatalog/pic_medbmkf3sc1cvr-01.jpg) How many times have heroes gone up against powerful villains only to get their asses handed to them? How many times have those heroes refocused their efforts and trained themselves harder to take on the villain again and, this time, win? A few billion. Hell, this isn't just comics. This is film. This is just plain ordinary story telling. Christ, it's what the whole Rocky series of movies is about. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: SirBruce on April 13, 2005, 11:51:14 AM You can do this all the way up to level 46, though for approximately 3 missions in 45 levels you would have to leave and level up before returning. This is generally true for most builds, except for a few pieces of content along the way. Since the design decision is now never to allow soloing even-con AVs, you'll be out of luck against those before and after 46. My scrapper who I mostly soloed has fought one AV by level 40. Yeah, scrappers are one of the best solo classes in CoH. Try it next time with a Dark/Dark Defender (although perhaps they've improved their abilities in the past few months). No, but they do get their ass handed to them in act 2, then come back and prevail in act 3 almsot universally due to one of the following.... 1) Training 2) More powers 3) Gaining allies 4) Better strategy and preparation. Which as far as I can tell look exactly like groups, levels, enhancements, and inspirations. Usually just 4. 1 and 2 are very rare; 3 is usually an exception "team-up" moment in an otherwise solo book. I don't see what your point here is, though. Bruce Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: SirBruce on April 13, 2005, 11:59:02 AM How many times have heroes gone up against powerful villains only to get their asses handed to them? How many times have those heroes refocused their efforts and trained themselves harder to take on the villain again and, this time, win? A few billion. Hell, this isn't just comics. This is film. This is just plain ordinary story telling. Christ, it's what the whole Rocky series of movies is about. I would not equate this with levelling. In most of the stories, the heroe does not gain new powers or get strong; rather, they use a new strategy. But they usually still solo it. Which is what the issue was here. I never claimed it would be wrong if you went up with an even-con AV, fail, and then come back and win with a different strategy. I claimed it would be wrong if you failed and then had to go get a group or beat up some lower-level thugs for a while to level up to come back and win. (Note that I'm not talking about having to kill thugs again as part of the "mission" to work your way back to the AV, which you do often see in comics but not as a mechanism for "levelling up" but merely to provide an obstacle for the hero to get their next shot.) Bruce Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Llava on April 13, 2005, 04:42:32 PM No, it is levelling up.
Neo got his ass handed to him by the agents until he became more powerful. He levelled up. Batman had been run ragged and lost his focus- you could say he lost levels here. He retrained himself and focused, levelling back up, then came and kicked some ass. Even looking at anime- Fatal Fury 2, the main character gets his ass kicked and barely survives his encounter with the villain in the beginning. He heals up, trains himself, masters new techniques, then wins the fight against the same villain at the end. I keep providing examples and you keep providing conjecture. And you've got a tough fight here, because for your point to be valid you have to prove that heroes almost never "level up" to defeat a powerful villain. I don't know how you're going to prove that, given that I've already shown numerous examples of this occuring. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Murgos on April 13, 2005, 06:45:54 PM No, it is levelling up. Dragon Ball Z. Fight, get ass kicked, go train, get experience, fight, win, repeat. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Llava on April 13, 2005, 07:00:05 PM Yup, another example.
Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: stray on April 13, 2005, 07:09:26 PM All of those examples have more to do with taking time out to consider their opponents' weaknesses than it does with "leveling up" or training.
Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Llava on April 13, 2005, 07:32:20 PM Except for the possible exception of the Batman example, you're wrong.
Neo didn't think about flaws in the Agents' styles. He increased his own mastery of the Matrix so that their strength was negligible. In Fatal Fury, Terry didn't think about Krauser's (woo I remembered their names) techniques and find ways to counter them. He trained himself in entirely new techniques that would overpower Krauser. Even with the Batman example, it wasn't that he thought about how he could exploit Azrael's weaknesses. He was at the top of his game when he went up against Azrael, completely refreshed and retrained. You can SAY they won because they considered their opponents' strategies, but then you're just forcing your own perspective on the stories to make your point. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: stray on April 13, 2005, 07:52:29 PM You can SAY they won because they considered their opponents' strategies, but then you're just forcing your own perspective on the stories to make your point. It also makes for a more fun game...But that's probably asking too much, isn't it? Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Trippy on April 13, 2005, 08:07:13 PM Batman had been run ragged and lost his focus- you could say he lost levels here. He retrained himself and focused, levelling back up, then came and kicked some ass. It was more like he wasn't at full HPs/Power/Energy when fighting Bane. Bane kept having villians attack Batman/Gotham City until like you said he was run ragged.Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Llava on April 14, 2005, 12:14:59 AM You can SAY they won because they considered their opponents' strategies, but then you're just forcing your own perspective on the stories to make your point. It also makes for a more fun game...But that's probably asking too much, isn't it? <shrug> You prefer the one on one fights. Some people prefer not having their fights against epic enemies trivialized because they chose to group. Then there's the problem of archetype. Some archetypes do not solo as well as others because they are meant for groups, and that's a tradeoff found in every single class-based MMOG I can think of that's out there. So if everything should be soloable by every archetype, then it's pretty trivial for a scrapper to tear through an archvillain balanced for a defender now isn't it? You guys are trying to bash one of the most solo friendly games around for having a smidgeon of group-only content. The only change I can see that needs to be made is that they need to remove the 3 missions-at-a-time limit and allow folks to abandon missions. That way if you don't want to group, you don't have to. Go do something else. Christ, there's a contact for the 46-50 people that specifically gives missions with archvillains. Just don't talk to her, problem solved. Aside from that? Maybe more distinctive bosses, like Moment. Moment was a cool character, felt like a comic book nemesis, and he was only a boss. The game needs more bosses with personality, then people won't feel like they have to fight archvillains. And if you do still feel like you absolutely must fight that archvillain, deal with it and get a group. Fuck if I know how you managed to tolerate any other MMOG with their high-end raid bosses that you actually do have to kill if you want to have any chance at staying competitive. All CoH does is offer the bosses and still you bitch that you can't do them on your own. At this point, I have to ask why you're even playing a game in a genre with forced social interaction. Diablo II is still up and running, and you can solo anything in that game. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: tar on April 14, 2005, 02:06:02 AM Quote from: eldaec btw, as you will already know AVs are puposefully rare. There are about half a dozen before level 45, and if you solo you are most unlikely to meet more than a couple of them. There are no circumstances in which you are forced to fight them. There are not even any optional accolades that require you to fight them. (as you will be aware, accolades are the badges that have effects beyond optional titles) I've pretty much agreed with all you've said, and I'm only bringing this up because it's (not what you said, the situation) pissed me off and is a big reason why I've hardly played CoH over the last few weeks. There are two story arcs in the 35-39 range where you are forced to fight AVs. Once you've started the story arc, there's no way to clear it other that completing it. Since you can only have 2 story arcs open at any one time, you must fight these two AVs in order to get any new ones. Short of hitting spoiler sites etc., there's no way to know that a story arc will end up with you having to fight an AV. Hell, there's no way to know a mission is going to start a story arc so there's no way to avoid locking your arcs. This (along with stamina being essential to have fun) is pissing me off enough to get me thinking about quitting. AVs shouldn't appear in story arc missions unless there's at least 3 people on the team or the difficulty level is above the basic. They should be downgraded to bosses or at most elite bosses. I'd group to clear them, but grouping with randoms=annoying and the people that I do know and would team with are too low level. I can only SK one of them up and two people ain't enough. /bitching ends Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: eldaec on April 14, 2005, 02:48:47 AM On Envoy of Shadows I'd agree with you, he is someone whose arc needs better labelling, if only because the Envoy is a bitch under any circumstances but especially at those levels, grouped or not - and the better labelling is something the devs have recognised as an issue (they already went through and made sure it is clear where bosses and eltie-bosses are probably in missions - some people balk even at them). I guess the other solution is to go the Terra route, Terra doesn't have most of the typical features of an AV but is rather dull as a result.
Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: tar on April 14, 2005, 04:06:57 AM While not having AVs actually be AVs and instead being bosses/elites if there aren't enough people on the team and the difficulty level is minimum (story arc missions only, not TFs or any other time you encounter AVs) is my preferred solution, I'd also be okay if you could lead a team and 'force' the team to your level. Kinda like mass sidekicking/exemplaring. To my mind this could solve an awful lot of grouping issues and I can't see any fiction or game breaking reason why this couldn't happen.
Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: stray on April 14, 2005, 04:33:03 AM You guys are trying to bash one of the most solo friendly games around for having a smidgeon of group-only content. Not exactly. I'm bashing MMO's in general (feel free to exclude me from this discussion if you wish....I know my opinions here aren't exactly helpful or constructive). I have nothing against teamwork and group content necessarily, and everything against games that use time investment as the main barrier to entry. In single player games (generally speaking), the player advances after he wisens up to the weaknesses and patterns of his enemies and/or obstacles. Not because he "trained" or what have you. "Training" certainly has it's place in the world (and yes, it often it occurs in hero stories), but as far as games go, it's bullshit and goes against everything that's fun about them. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Glazius on April 14, 2005, 05:58:58 AM While not having AVs actually be AVs and instead being bosses/elites if there aren't enough people on the team and the difficulty level is minimum (story arc missions only, not TFs or any other time you encounter AVs) is my preferred solution, I'd also be okay if you could lead a team and 'force' the team to your level. Kinda like mass sidekicking/exemplaring. To my mind this could solve an awful lot of grouping issues and I can't see any fiction or game breaking reason why this couldn't happen. Pre-Praetorians you can take down an archvillain with a 4-hero team. (You can do that for some of the Praetorians too.) I remember toppling the Clockwork King with a tank, a blaster, and someone else kind enough to buy inspirations for the both of us. All you need to do is find one other person near your level and then you can get an AV-capable team "forced" to your level. Since "seek team" gives you access to everybody in-game (and it's being vastly improved in I4) this is generally not hard to do. I've put together pentad respec teams in 10 minutes, 8-man 8-hour task force teams in 20. I've noticed that in the arcs that lead to archvillains the missions are usually pretty good about saying "this could be the start of something big". There are a few ones that are a little misleading, but sometimes I wonder if that's deliberate. "Hey, GenericHero310, I want you to go have a look at this totally innocuous-sounding dimension and HOLY SHIT ARCHVILLAIN + DEFEAT ALL". But the weird thing is, CoH is the first MMOG I've played where I _want_ to group. Make of that what you will. --GF Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: HaemishM on April 14, 2005, 09:22:26 AM The only change I can see that needs to be made is that they need to remove the 3 missions-at-a-time limit and allow folks to abandon missions. That way if you don't want to group, you don't have to. Go do something else. I completely agree with this. While it would be somewhat fiction-breaking, it would serve the game better. And since we are already breaking fiction daily (by walking/flying/running/jumping) past crimes happening on the street that are too low level to give us any experience or influence, I don't see it as a big deal. It would certainly make the game flow more smoothly. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: CmdrSlack on April 14, 2005, 09:33:17 AM The only change I can see that needs to be made is that they need to remove the 3 missions-at-a-time limit and allow folks to abandon missions. That way if you don't want to group, you don't have to. Go do something else. I completely agree with this. While it would be somewhat fiction-breaking, it would serve the game better. And since we are already breaking fiction daily (by walking/flying/running/jumping) past crimes happening on the street that are too low level to give us any experience or influence, I don't see it as a big deal. It would certainly make the game flow more smoothly. The abandoning missions thing would be huge, especially now that I know you can only have two story arcs active at once. Not like that matters too much, I am starting to get the feeling that doing all of the Hollows missions, and now on my third contact in Striga, I may be missing story arcs anyway. Striga is great and I like the story and watching the Sky Raider Skiffs scrambling off the runway, etc. but at the same time, I really dig story arcs...so it's kind of a tough one. Even if I keep up with my contacts in Talos and IP, I have a very strong feeling that I'm missing out on arc triggers. It would be nice to be able to abandon missions...especially if it allows me to manage to trigger arcs by better mission picks. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Glazius on April 15, 2005, 06:11:57 AM The only change I can see that needs to be made is that they need to remove the 3 missions-at-a-time limit and allow folks to abandon missions. That way if you don't want to group, you don't have to. Go do something else. I completely agree with this. While it would be somewhat fiction-breaking, it would serve the game better. And since we are already breaking fiction daily (by walking/flying/running/jumping) past crimes happening on the street that are too low level to give us any experience or influence, I don't see it as a big deal. It would certainly make the game flow more smoothly. The abandoning missions thing would be huge, especially now that I know you can only have two story arcs active at once. Not like that matters too much, I am starting to get the feeling that doing all of the Hollows missions, and now on my third contact in Striga, I may be missing story arcs anyway. Striga is great and I like the story and watching the Sky Raider Skiffs scrambling off the runway, etc. but at the same time, I really dig story arcs...so it's kind of a tough one. Even if I keep up with my contacts in Talos and IP, I have a very strong feeling that I'm missing out on arc triggers. It would be nice to be able to abandon missions...especially if it allows me to manage to trigger arcs by better mission picks. Abandoning is currently in the dev pipeline, but we haven't heard anything about what issue it's going to show up in yet. --GF Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: CmdrSlack on April 15, 2005, 11:09:55 AM Ah, sweet.
Time to go kick some more vampyr ass then, I guess. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: HaemishM on April 15, 2005, 11:17:55 AM What level do the Striga Isle missions start to run out? I ran out of the two contacts in the Isle I've gotten since I hit 28, and they haven't given me new contacts. I love that zone, and didn't really start pounding on it til I hit 24. Am I just out of missions there?
Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: CmdrSlack on April 15, 2005, 11:59:51 AM I'm on my third contact there.
I had the first woman, then the longshoreman guy, and now another dude deeper into Striga. He wouldn't give me missions until 25. I started in Striga at 20. I'm of no use to you, apparently. But hey, if you want to meet up when you normally play, I'm at 25, almost 26 right now. You could exemp down or I could ratchet up the difficulty to eleven and we could run thru some of the stuff if you're somehow bugged out of further Striga goodness. I'm running a home office now, so I'm either here or out on the bike. Mostly here, it's too cold to ride lately. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: tazelbain on April 15, 2005, 02:33:52 PM I believe there are 2 arcs in Strige. One leads to base infilitrastion and the other leads to an AV. I don't know if you can get both arcs.
Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: eldaec on April 15, 2005, 05:27:01 PM There are 2 contacts that handle 20-25. 2 more for 25-30.
Plus a TF contact, and a second TF contact that you can only get if you complete all the 4 mission contacts. They don't use formal arcs, though the missions do make up a story. You also get a use based temporrary power for completing each set (2 hours of resist to all damage, 75 holy shotgun shells, 5 uses of a werewolf summoning whistle, etc etc). The AV refered to above is probably Maestro, who is at the end of the second 20-25 contact. If you are 28 and still only have Stephanie Peebles and Long Jack, you should probably talk to Jack again. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: HaemishM on April 15, 2005, 10:56:31 PM I ended up outleveling Long Jack before I could do his missions. I've already done the missions for Lars and his brother. Other than the TF, I'm plum out of missions there. Shame. One of the best zones they've done so far.
Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: eldaec on April 16, 2005, 04:58:01 AM For me the most exciting thing about CoV is that the devs have claimed that the pve content has all been developed with the Striga/Hollows lessons incorporated. Meaning less travel between zones, more coherent stories between missions, no stupid low ceilings or really dark tilesets that make navigation unfun, temporary powers consistently being use based and therefore hoardable, more 'elite' bosses (which generally means bosses with a few high level hero powers) etc etc.
Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: Llava on April 17, 2005, 12:08:35 PM The only thing about mission abandoning is that it can't be a band-aid fix, they have to go the whole way with it. Otherwise, people could end up locking themselves out of story arcs, or abandoning missions only to find that that's the only mission left for their level bracket and they have nothing else to do... or abandoning a "high priority" mission that appears across contacts and basically being forced to do it (like the security chief missions, for example- if your contact wants you to do that, chances are some other contacts want you to as well).
There's an intrinsic problem with some missions, though. That's that the story wants you to be surprised at the outcome, and the game sometimes suffers because of that. Like an above post mentioned, it's one of those "Go check out this innocuous little dimension that certainly has nothing important on it and you're just on a quick reconnaisance mission HOLY SHIT PSYCHIC CLOCKWORK KING". It's a tough call. That particular example doesn't show how important those twists can be to the story, but I think we can imagine that. But the other side is that players always want to know exactly what they're getting into. MMOG players don't like risk/reward. They like "This is EXACTLY what will happen, this is EXACTLY what you will get." Look at Warcraft. Title: Re: Some Stuff From Statesman. Post by: jpark on April 17, 2005, 01:41:25 PM I do like the idea of increasing the mission difficulty comensurate with increased reputation benefit. I am not currently playing, but up to level 37 I found that if I really wanted a tough fight I had to go to the street - missions were generally too easy.
This at least is a move in the right direction for me. I don't have a problem wiht increased SO cost - it seemed to me I was pretty maxed out and fitted most of the time - so that would provide some more challenge. |