Electric-Knight
-
Posts
4379 -
Joined
-
Also, Sam, because I'd feel bad about not addressing it before I split...
I can't speak to the specific timings you are offering and it is certainly possible that Mines take more time than I had mentioned, but if you do it correctly, you do it with little harm. It is just a different game doing that and it is one some of us find interesting.
I don't know what the differences are... but I have certainly found it a lot more successful than you are saying with your experiences.
You also do not need a corner to lay down mines. I'm not entirely sure why you'd think that was the case.
You can do it perfectly fine in a completely open space. Zero cover, zero corners, walls or anything. You just have to draw them in a straight line for it to work well.
And, by the way, I would expect a Fire/Fire Blaster to melt things more quickly.
I'm not basing my entire observation on Devices. It is an extreme case, for certain. And it is not perfect. However, it also performs well.
I will agree that it does not perform so well on teams.
However, again, that is not entirely a negative. It is okay for the soloist to have something special. Remove that in order to make it a more standard team performer and it no longer has the ability to be what it is (successfully, despite whether you claim it is completely broken or not). There's been many a discussion about Devices (and it does need a bit of improving, I'm not even saying it doesn't need any), but it doesn't need to have Trip Mines changed. They can be leveraged to do insane things.
You can claim I'm spouting out nonsense, but you are over-stating the level of ineffectiveness that Devices has.
Do you want Devices to be as easy and fall-asleep-at-the-keyboard as being a Scrapper?
Maybe Scrappers and Brutes and Stalkers should all be brought to the level of requiring a lot more effort from the player! -
I'm only going to reply quickly right now, but, Sam, have a look at the exchanges between Hyperstrike and Dr_Mechano as further illustration of what I am referring to.
And it is not circular quasi-philosophy... it has extremely real ramifications on overall game experience and balance.
If someone's belief that X powerset/AT is no good because it does not hold up to their standard, the balancing of that powerset to meet that standard will come at the cost of taking away what that powerset was already balanced for including (at the cost of what they'd now be increasing).
Want to make FF a less "boring" powerset?
Sure... then the powers and the functionality will no longer be "effortless" and its advantage of being a set and forget, while being able to focus on your other powers, gets screwed with and/or eliminated.
All because Harry thinks Frank's vehicle needs to be heavier and more powerful.
One last quick thing... I thought I made it pretty clear what my SWG talk had to do with this topic. It is about diversity and I do not believe you are grasping that there is such diversity, not just in appearances, but in actual approach. Do you really think that some of the problems that you have with certain ATs and powersets is entirely the game's problem and not something to do with your own preferences, quirks, immensely picky standards?
Of course everything is combat here... but the combat has a semblance of diversity that has to do with what I referred to with SWG... different strokes for different folks and if you want to tailor a game for a mainstream set of standards... be my guest, but you'll be limiting your field of customers more than if you do have those outliers.
Anyway... I have to run. I appreciate the reply, but I believe you are stuck on the idea that I was over-thinking... without actually considering that you're finding the truth I spoke of as elusive and difficult as I began my observation with.
Keep following other people's replies in here and you'll see more of the same difference of preferences being misconstrued as mathematical data points. -
Quote:Sam, you seem to be missing a very important point.Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
You're making it a lot more complicated than it is. I don't hate Devices because it's "different." I hate Devices because it takes me three times as long to achieve anything as it takes my Fire Mastery or Energy Mastery Blaster, and that's if I'm lucky and my mines don't fizzle. I don't dislike Dual Pistols because it uses Swap Ammo and not Build Up. I dislike it because its overall DPA is horrid and I keep getting killed winding up over-long animations that an AT of such fragility doesn't benefit that much from. I disliked Stalkers before the change because they were forced to play smarter and harder and still only ever match Scrapper and Brute performance, who could achieve the same by falling asleep at the keyboard.
What the goal of game balancing should be is to let every player reach the same level of progression and performance with roughly the same level of skill and involvement. Exactly what the player has to do to achieve this isn't relevant, nor is the specific difficulty of achieving it, what matters is that all ATs and all powersets strike if not exactly that kind of balance, then at least something close to it.
At the end of the day, I will not play an AT or a powerset that constantly makes me feel like I'm working twice as hard to do half as good as most of my other characters. I don't care if its playstyle is an outlier, unique or interesting. If the character can't perform up to par, then there's something wrong with that character. And if I can't fix what's wrong with the build, then something's wrong with how that character is balanced, and something needs to be fixed. It's really just that simple.
I don't believe in "hard mode" characters. Hard mode is easily achievable by increasing your difficulty, and you're even rewarded more for it. If a character is "harder" to play than others at the same difficulty, all that means is that character is levelling up more slowly. That's precisely what got Blasters to Defiance 2.0 - Blasters were dying more, playing less and levelling slower than all other characters by a significant margin. They were clearly and provably underperforming, so they were improved. Not enough in my book, but apparently enough for people to play them again.
Variety and diversity can still exist in a system where most characters using most builds do roughly as well as each other. They don't need to accomplish this in the same way using the same tactics, just so long as they level about equally as fast in the hands of the same player. It's not about preference, uniqueness or technique. It's about performance. Nail that and you can proceed to be as unique about how you do it as you want.
Devices doesn't actually take that much longer, if you do it right.Quote:You're making it a lot more complicated than it is. I don't hate Devices because it's "different." I hate Devices because it takes me three times as long to achieve anything as it takes my Fire Mastery or Energy Mastery Blaster, and that's if I'm lucky and my mines don't fizzle.
If you set up enough mines, you can basically one-shot an Elite Boss (okay, two shot, if you shoot him to pull him into the mine field).
The amount of time it takes to lay all those mines is about the same amount of time it'd take to whittle the EB's health with regular attacks.
The biggest difference is... You do so without taking a shot from the EB.
You may not like this approach.
Others do.
That is my point. And you've proven it true with many of the things you've said.
What exactly does get balanced around is entirely up to the designers, but when we players talk about fixing things, many players completely dismiss different playstyles in favor of their own.
As you clearly display here:
And here:Quote:I disliked Stalkers before the change because they were forced to play smarter and harder and still only ever match Scrapper and Brute performance, who could achieve the same by falling asleep at the keyboard.
You want it to work how you play and you don't want it to work any other way.Quote:What the goal of game balancing should be is to let every player reach the same level of progression and performance with roughly the same level of skill and involvement. Exactly what the player has to do to achieve this isn't relevant, nor is the specific difficulty of achieving it, what matters is that all ATs and all powersets strike if not exactly that kind of balance, then at least something close to it.
Exactly my point.
I'm not going to argue that you're wrong, because it is just a matter of opinion.
And it is the opinion of the designers (and their estimates for a good business plan) that makes the decision.
I've played and loved a game that had far greater differences in how you play the game and what you could do in the game - from arranging sequences in music or dances, to harvesting resources, to running and checking large machines doing things for you, to building things for yourself or other players with your own unique ingredients and customizations, to flying space ships, to fighting in melee, to fighting at ranged, to tracking down wild creatures for their very particular hides or bones or for sampling their DNA or to cautiously approach a young one and tame them and take them in as a pet and train them as they slowly grow into your attack beast, to fighting for political sides, to running a town or a city as a mayor... I've probably left out a few things.
This was all within the same game and all aspects of play were designed and intended to be a completely legitimate standalone aspect of play. You could never touch another aspect of gameplay other than the one(s) you wanted and you'd still be paying for (and playing) a game suitable to your wants.
City Of Heroes has some semblance of this as well, all through the different ATs and the very different powersets within those ATs.
When somebody says and thinks the way you do... that your personal preferences are the standard that all ATs and/or powersets should appeal to... then you're doing a disservice to true differentiation and the potential benefit of disparity.
Of course, I agree that an overall balance of fair value for your time should be kept (one option that just plain cannot compete is likely a very bad thing).
However, just because a particular player cannot make an option work, does not mean that it is out of balance or underpowered.
As I said... it is a difficult and elusive thing for people to understand, recognize and agree upon.
And, of course, I agree that any designer/developer is free to balance their game however they choose.
To me, it looks apparent that CoH was intentionally designed with a few outliers. Those outliers are not under-performing. They just take a different approach.
Some options are square pegs... and your playstyle is a round hole. -
This post is not a blanket NO to adjusting, fixing and tweaking things, so please don't take it that way.
What I believe to be the most elusive and problematic factor in determining under-performance of a powerset/AT, and the reasons for it, is accounting for playstyle and personal preference.
Among players, the personal perspective easily skews the reality of differentiation.
What style of play sets the standard for determining ineffectiveness? And if you use one playstyle, then is there no longer the wonderful differentiation for the players that do enjoy the outliers?
Should an mmorpg be about having every single AT and powerset capable of doing everything relatively the same way? The common perceptions of acceptability may not be enjoyed by everyone. Remove a reasonable amount of struggling from an AT or a powerset and does it lose the luster that made it appealing to others? Remove the oddities from powerset options and, sure, more players interested in one particular playstyle might choose any of the powersets, but should the grand scope of an mmorpg be to accommodate and maintain a standard or is it better to cater to differentiation?
Forget the number of people playing the specific powersets, as that is what only the developers know and then they can decide if it needs addressing.
What I am referring to is the actual direction of changes people wish for.
Should every powerset within an AT be able to stand toe-to-toe with their enemies in roughly the same fashion and succeed with roughly the same strategy?
If everything is basically equal on the main scale of complacently standing, attacking and surviving, then the balancing factor of the differences must also be equal... And if you equal out those differences... what would be different at all? Just the animations and effects?
Some people would love for /Devices to be made more like the other secondary powersets. Some people love the completely different way of successfully using that powerset (although, I think everyone agrees that Time Bomb could be fixed in a major way).
Devices may be the most extreme example there is.
Often times, it is the different nature of successfully using a powerset that makes some people dislike a powerset and/or claim that it is under-performing and requires help.
Often times, it is just a matter of personal preference. Much like different vehicles or even foods.
Harry might like the lighter, more maneuverable vehicle, while Frank prefers the heavier, more powerful vehicle.
I see a lot of Franks test drive Harry's vehicle and claim it needs to be fixed.
Anyway, this is not a post about never changing or fixing anything.
It is just a personal observation on the nature of perceived needs vs. acceptable differences.
And I had some time and some ramble in me. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
IIRC, just hovering near that with Fly will - or at least used to - do that, too. And if you don't have leaves, find someone with /em throwconfetti or the like.Yep. Without knowing any of that before I created him, it always worked well for the Electric-Knight, because he flies via ionizing the air and creating static carrier waves... When I saw small objects around me (usually Council shell casings, hah) being affected by it, I was pleasantly surprised.Quote:Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I believe Fly and Hover are envisioned as lifting you up via some sort of updraught, so if you hover over particles on the ground, they get sucked up along the length of your body and spat out in a shower over your head. So, yeah, that also works.
-
Quote:For whatever it is worth:Originally Posted by stevie_james
As much as I love Broad Sword, War Mace and Katana... Battle Axe seems lacking to me. Maybe it's the animations but I seriously doubt it.
I'm nowhere near the number cruncher that some people are but I can't seem to get hooked on Battle Axe even with a solid concept that I enjoy.
Any thoughts? I would especially like to hear from people who DO like the set considering I want to like it. Though, I'm repeatedly told that if I want an axe go with the one in Titan Weapons.
I often feel like the weapon options in Battle Axe really hold it back for me and my enjoyment.
I've never actually made one, so I can't speak to playing one, but one of the biggest reasons I've never made one is because the weapon choices just never seem to appeal to me.
I think, mostly, they just seem too small. I don't want ginormous axes, but just something slightly more super. -
Is that a new chest emblem with the star and separated half circles?
Quote:Originally Posted by DumpleBerry
...
If this is enough to encourage people to go back in time and stay subscribed, then they've done their job well.
I still have to fix the flux capacitor... but... there's no rush, since I've got all the time in the world. -
Eeeheee!!
And Singularities are put to the re-sorting of trash and recycling throughout the city! -
I think that one of the problems a lot of people have is not accepting or understanding that different ATs and different powersets within ATs can and do play differently and not everyone is going to enjoy the ways that certain powersets and/or ATs function successfully.
If a particular AT or powerset doesn't jive with a particular person's preferences/enjoyment, then they might think it needs help. And I don't always agree with that assessment (that balance is for the developers/designers to decide).
While I do feel like Blasters could benefit from a little bit of love, as someone who absolutely loves playing every blaster set I've tried, I fear that too many people think that "fixing" Blasters requires making them something far too different than what they already are.
The main problem I see with Blasters is that when the Devs want to have something really show its strength/difficulty, so much so that it'll hurt the heftier ATs, Blasters really suffer for it. That's an extremely tough balancing act for the developers though, so I don't complain about it possibly not being perfect.
I just cringe every time I see people say that Blasters need a lot of work and/or are too squishy... How squishy is not too squishy and how not too squishy makes playing them less fun for those of us who love them now?
That is the difficult balancing point I see in approaching Blasters from the squishy side... I'm all for giving them some more damage, even though I know the damage level can't really be on par with their lack of hitpoints/defenses/resistances/mezprotection.
I'm okay with them suffering a bit more, but I think the gap could be lessened a bit without ruining the thrilling fighter-pilot AT of the game. -
Quote:I was actually thinking the same thing.Originally Posted by blueruckus
There's also a slight chance that this might have happened.
-
Quote:Understood and I don't entirely disagree!Originally Posted by Tenzhi
As someone who's dealt with the issue numerous times with new video games that are held for a street date, I'd say that the fact that the practice isn't strange doesn't make it any less hateful.
-
I suppose it is apparent that the differing levels of transparency have created the negativity some customers have been feeling and expressing.
While I have been fine being patient and haven't been upset by any of this, I do understand both sides of the issue.
The transparency created by the open testing and access VIPs get on future content contributed. Even the transparency of March's rough release schedule via War Witch's letter contributed a bit.
The company's transparency with the fact that they withhold things that are ready for multiple business purposes has contributed to some of the negativity.
And then, of course, the lack of transparency regarding when these customers can accurately expect a particular item has been a major contributor.
As far as holding things back due to business practices...
I know it can come off wrongly for an eager customer (and I am certainly not going to say that it is always the right way to go - for business purposes), but this is practically a given for any and every item anyone has ever purchased (beyond perishables, hehe). Whether it is that new, fancy, shiny tech you're eager to get your hands on, your favorite artist's new album, the next episode of a television show, or a piece of clothing you ordered from a new catalog... they're made and finished before you get your hands/ears/eyes on them.
In that respect, you might want to keep your heads in check and understand that, this isn't a strange practice. It is just that you happen to know that thing you want is just sitting around, uselessly, while you'd like to already have it (like tracking your item on UPS... WHY IS IT JUST SITTING IN THE WAREHOUSE!!?!?! I especially love it when it is driven from one warehouse, past your neighborhood just to sit in another warehouse, hehe).
Of course, I think the company could have done a better job by letting the eager customers know that they won't be getting it until a specific date (as best as they could state as time passes). One week ahead of time doesn't really change much about this past situation. All of March was pretty well covered. Then April came and many eager people wanted to know and/or made false assumptions. Fault doesn't matter... just observation and positive adjustments.
Big ticket items, such as powersets may be best to have a little more information regarding their potential release schedule.
Then again, maybe all of this angst was good? Any press is good press?
The big point I wanted to express is that it is super easy to sit on the other side and point out how the creators/suppliers/sellers are doing it wrong.
It really only takes a tiny little slip here or there and you can have the packs of wild armchair critics descend upon you.
If Staff Fighting went first and we were waiting around for Beast Mastery, while there would have been plenty of people who were A-Okay with this and could completely rationalize it in ways that they'd fully believe should assuage anyone else's complaints, there would have been the same threads and posts of angst regarding the lack of information, the "pointless" waiting (as BM wouldn't have been touched in Beta all this time either) and so on and so forth, once April, and its unmapped schedule, began.
As the creator and distributor, there are a multitude of factors involved. And, while it may seem unreasonable, to some, how certain scenarios play out... 1-2 months of waiting for a new shiny toy may not seem so ridiculous to them. And that's not such an unreasonable stance to take, regardless of your position.
In closing, if you read this and didn't like it... please submit a written complaint and place it on my desk.
-
Quote:Originally Posted by Megajoule
and then the Sheriff apologizes, lets him go and pardons him.
Okay, consecutive posts that made me laugh merit another useless post by me relaying my humorous appreciation!!Quote:Originally Posted by SerialBeggar
YO!Quote:Originally Posted by Rubberlad
That's the space kook villain from Scooby Doo.. You know, the one that tries to scare everyone away from the abandoned airfield so he can buy it dirt cheap then sell it back to the government at a hefty price...
Like Halliburton does. >}(
Spoilers, man! Spoilers!
-
As far as new things in Beta that we'd like to see (likely as paid for packs, separate from the free costumes we'll be getting with I23):
Quote:This.Originally Posted by Thirty-Seven
I desperately want the Drudge heads/faces and related details available to Player Characters!!
With a cherry on top?
No, not on the heads... on the request.
So very much this!!
-
Yeah, my brain is still trying to wrap around how this change is going to feel, hehe.
I'm guessing that toggle pets will be there to greet us as well. I don't even have any characters that uses such a pet, but the idea of the german shepherd being there to greet me when I log in makes me smile, hehe.
Hmmm... it is possible that this may be related to trying to make it so that powers like Walk, Rocket Board, Flying Carpet and all don't leave you with having to put all of your toggles back on... I wonder...
Quote:Hah, I tend to do that as well!Originally Posted by mousedroid
Heh. I've always had a habit of turning off all my characters' toggles before I log out anyway.
Not sure why I started doing it, but I suspect at one time it was because it felt like "powering down" after a hard day of crime or crime-fighting. -
Hmmm... Maybe The Proud Sensai Vanity Pet!!
I was wearing the wrong hat for that joke. Wait... who stole my periwinkle hat?? -
Quote:You heard it here first!Originally Posted by Zwillinger
...We will, of course, have items featured next week that compliment Staff Fighting.
Coming next week, the Positive Critic Vanity Pet!! -
Quote:Frankly, I've had more than enough of that two-legged rig.Originally Posted by Doctor Roswell
On the bright side, if this is all we get, at least it's not another week of them cramming that 4-legged rig down our throats again.
-
Eh, I am not convinced that there won't be something more added in the morning.
I'm not sure why it has gone that way a few times, but it has.
We'll just have to see. -
As others have said, the options are pretty much all open to you.
My initial thoughts were two different paths:
A Corrupter of some sort (maybe /Rad for the debuffs you love so much) for some additional support with a nice amount of damage. I could see going anything/Rad or Dark/Dark or Fire/Dark or truly any combination that you find interesting. Maybe it'll help you decide by trying to match your character's concept/theme somewhat to your girlfriend's (even if that's not a big element to your playing, it can still help make fun combos).
The other thought I had was a Tank (or, hey, even a Brute).
With your own survivability plus the MM's support, you can handle all or most of the aggro and help keep your GF's pets alive, while they happily chomp and chew at her command.
Either could be a lot of fun.
Think about if you would enjoy or hate being in the thick of melee with all of her pets.
Some may hate that... others may not mind one bit. That is the only thing that jumped out at me as a possible problem duo-ing with an MM.
Best of luck! -
Quote:I wake up every day thinking the same exact thing!!Originally Posted by MisterMagpie
I find myself disappointed that Electric-Knight hasn't lost his mind.
Also, I apparently find it funnier to think of people looking at my post without knowing the in-joke than knowing it... I hadn't even thought of people not recognizing it, but once I saw responses of that sort, they made me laugh more than the actual joke. Haha, that is great.
Although, Party-Kake, great call on the jerk-hexers, haha. I should have gone with that!! -
Quote:Originally Posted by Thirty-Seven
No need to do tha
Wait, that was sarcasm too wasn't it? You know that I know that your other post wasn't serious... don't you? Oh, heck.
This is precisely why sarcasm in text form must be brought to a complete stop. Think of the children.
-
this what happened in the last game i played wizards ruined it for everyone castin spells and tricks and just anything to cheat there no technology there trying to catch the wizardand we pay for it so unless people don't let GM'S know of witchcraft in the game it we ruin it and there we not be a COH IT WELL BE GONE TO THE WIZARDS !!!!!!!
-
Quote:Hahaha... What's funny about the screenshot is I was thinking that one of you was being a wiseass by mimicking what the other one sent in a tell... then I suddenly realized that a tell sent to someone with the same name would come to you... haha... crazy.Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
I may actually *have* said screen shot. I'd have to look. (A friend and I were both trying to reserve another friend's name, since she was having some issue trying to log on... surprisingly *cough.*)
Note that we'd coordinated after to try and see if it could happen again - couldn't get it to.
*SNIP*
EDIT:
HahahaQuote:Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
No. Friend's character name is Vakyrierising. We were just happening to try to snag it for her at the same time. So we would have no reason to misspell it.
(I fully believe that neither of you misspelled it at the time, but this was just humorous enough to point out) -
His feet are just stapled to the ground...
He is an Ex-NPC.