Ericose

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
an invul tank actually has a chance of fighting back if he's tpfoed though. a mm has the lowest HP out of all heros/villains, and loses their offensive power and bodyguard when tpfoed

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, TP Foe has ridiculous Range. That should be cut to 60-80 feet in PvP like any other ranged attack. What makes TP Foe exempt from basic normal range in PvP and shouldn't there be a pool power resist for TP Foe? Manuevers maybe?

I don't know about you, but most of the time I get tp foed, it is into a) a drone, or b) a group of 3 or more and then you get tp'd onto caltrops, ice slick, tar patch, etc, then you get hit by major toggle dropper and then you are just like a babe for the taking. A double AS will take a tank out as long as they both hit. Doesn't matter what AT, the difference between the tank and the MM is how long it takes for you to die. You need to get around that. If you are getting tp foed by 1 person, you should be able to find out where they are camping and stay out of their range.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, TP Foe has ridiculous Range. That should be cut to 60-80 feet in PvP like any other ranged attack. What makes TP Foe exempt from basic normal range in PvP and shouldn't there be a pool power resist for TP Foe? Manuevers maybe?

[/ QUOTE ]
So you want it to be changed to "almost teleport " foe? What makes it exempt is the fact that it's teleport! it does take a tohit roll. You can only tp foe 1 person at a time- what happened to your teammates? All in all sounds like a tactics problem than a power problem. The power seems to do exactly what it's supposed to. Worse comes to worse TP yourself out (or have a teammate do it).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

From now on, I'm going to use the term wordhumper to refer to you. It's not derogatory, so you can't object. It means, "Person who loves words".

[/ QUOTE ]

I can object. It is impolite in most conversations to call someone by other then their normal name. No one calls me that so you are trying to rename me. That is rude and can be argued even derogatory.

In comparison the word "Toon" to the general public is considered not derogatory and not rude. It is a word commonly used even by the die hard fans of the very group who it applies to.

Belldandy

[/ QUOTE ]

But if you relabel my character a toon, that devalues my hard work.



[/ QUOTE ]
If it's hard work you're playing the wrong game- or not getting paid enough.

I prefer char. myself but will use toon with those that use it so it's not confusing. IMHO toon just shows lack of experience with MMO and PnP RPGs.

a few comments...

[ QUOTE ]
...except for earlier in the thread, where you complain that you can't tank without healing. If you could tank group-sized spawns without healing, we'd be right back to the Bad Old Days.


[/ QUOTE ]
if by bad old days you mean when the server was chock full of people and teams were easy to find and the game was really fun to play- I say bring me back the "bad old days"
...
[ QUOTE ]

Xeno's already covered this but it bears repeating. MMOs are a social activity. What one person does affects everyone in the society. If people can use exploits, design flaws or broken builds to trivialize content it doesn't just ruin the game for them as if they were cheating at solitaire. It affects the levelling curve. It affects grouping dynamics, both by affecting the curve and because the tactic in question will leak out and get used by groups. Even if everyone who ever used the tactic in question only ever played solo, its use would spread and trivialize the game for more and more people. That's exactly what's been happening to CoH.


[/ QUOTE ]
Essentially incorrect. MMORPGs can be a social activity but how fast you level and how fast I level are not related. COH has been trivialized because instead of improving the content (including mob dynamics) the devs have chosen to screw around with the game mechanics (not that other MMORPGs don't but I haven't heard of a successful game that has essentially completly eliminated the original game machanics like COH has). Wether folks PL, cheat, exploit, run macros, or hire folks to level their toon, has absolutely no effect on the way you have to play your game.


[/ QUOTE ]
...
[ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but you're just being obstinate here. ED is incorporated into the design of CoV, meaning that to roll back ED all of CoV would have to be redone.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the powers would have to be tweaked again- something the devs have proven themselves to have alot of practice at.

[ QUOTE ]
Still, I think you diminished the game, overall. I fear that deep down, when you think of true comic book heroes, you're thinking of Archie and Jughead instead of, say, Spider-Man and Green Lantern.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the best line of the entire thread- summarizes all my frustrations succintly and explains what I think the "vision" is about.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks States. Issue 5 has not been the doomsday that many said it would be and for that I'm thankful.



[/ QUOTE ]




You have to be kidding. Paragon is now a ghost town. My friends list is permantly gray.

Sorry but my Tank still hates I5. The Devs had well over a year to make the tanks "work as intended" and these new changes just seem pulled out of their butts. A few inspirations are not going to cut it. Many of us still feel betrayed.

[/ QUOTE ]

DITTO

[/ QUOTE ]

ditto- if I'm lucky I'll catch one on the weekends but it looks like once their subs expire they're gone

[ QUOTE ]

No they actually said they will give respecs after I5. Read this post ---> Exchange between Statesman and me.

Where he again confirms that respecs are coming after I5.

-----------
Please don't argue this point anymore guys. It just spreads disinformation. The devs have stated several time that respecs are coming with I5. I could find some more posts for you, but I'm late meeting my wife as it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Myabe you got the wrong post from statesman quoted but this is what I see:

"We might giving out more respecs in the future, though I can’t make any definitive comment on that."

Which is FAR from what you say: "The devs have stated several time that respecs are coming with I5"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thus the solution for now is to PL until you can solo, then solo whenever possible. Personally I no longer do AV missions since I can't solo them. This apparenlty makes the devs happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm... so my solution is to not play the game but let someone else PL me so I can miss all the lvls and content that I'm paying $15 a month for??

rrrRRRRRrrrrrriiiiggghhhhhttt....

[/ QUOTE ]

By all means do the content of you haven't seen it before and/or enjoy it. The XP range has absolutely no impact on either enjoyng or distracting from the content. It has to do with the overall gameplay and "fun" factor- which is what I enjoyed the most.

Re-read the post you quoted from and think of it this way. At some point however, you will think the game is grinding. Prior to the xp leash, the solution was to team up and hunt, and maybe meet some folks you might want to team up with in the future. Now if you want the same rapid swing in Xp you have to PL-(and if you thought street sweeping was boring- PLing is snoozapalooza- but at least you are thru boring levels without wasting time). AND if you want to get a much XP as you can, it's better to solo.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I forget where but I read one of the devs state that the -acc on the travel powers screwed up PvP- which is why it was removed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Statesman's own post on the change specifically refered to the feel of play, not PvP. He was clear that the roll back was due to the impact on fun it was having. You should be able to find it by going to the official thread.

As to datamining vs opinion, player feedback is an indicator to an issue, datamining is done to confrirm or refute the problem and to identify specific mechanics involved. That they do fact checking to verify player concerns doesn't mean they are not acting as a result of those concerns. I can't imagine anyone in any professional field that wouldn't want to gather as much data as possible on an issue before trying to resolve it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the tip on who posted about the -acc debuff- here is the link.

I think this quote from the post says it all "Yes, the Accuracy debuff is unpopular (as most power tweaks or nerfs are perceived), but it doesn't cripple the game. I didn't think that this single problem should derail our publishing process."

If fun was the overriding concern, than anything that is KNOWN not to add to the enjoyment of the game should have been dropped (saying that it is Ok because it didn't cripple the game- I'm stunned- especially when they decide when to ship!!). This clearly is not the overriding concern.

So how did they know it was not fun- players told them during the test phase before it was released. So if you know it was not going to be well recieved, and release it anyway, then undo it, what was the motivation. Clearly it wasn't player opinion, that changed the decision- cause that was already given. That only leaves datamining. Of course datamining should be done to determine the mechanics involved, and as a confirmation of a problem. But, as I have explained, datamining seems to be the deciding factor rather than additional evidence of an already known problem.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can you show an example of where player feedback has changed the devs minds? I can't think of any. Datamining has changed their minds for sure ( and possbily datamining AND feedback). For me the tell is exactly what Cuppa said "The Devs are happy with the changes".

Apparently at Cryptic, the theory is the customer must have ordered the wrong thing- they KNOW what you want, regardless of what you want.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tanker complaints about the Pool Power Provoke, for one. Scrapper complaints about not having a use in groups, for another. (Which got criticals added). Changes to Martial Arts animation times. Dark Armor and Stone Armor now stacking, as well as the new look to Stone Armor. There was an issue on the Test Server where the Dev's had added Knockback to one of the Tanker Powers (A super strength power, I believe) and the Tankers had quite a few negative things to say to it, which led to the new Knockdown/Knockback system being added instead.

Those are just off the top of my head.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't find any of those that didn't get datamined to the devs satisfaction first before the change. So at best the change was made after players called attention to something that wasn't working as the devs intended.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that if someone complains, they ought to make changes without investigating the problem? Datamining is a way of looking at the problem, and verifying that one actually exists. Our input helps them determine how to mine the data, and what kind of problems to look for.

[/ QUOTE ]

One would think a test server would help in that regard but now we know that it's just a codebase test. They should datamine to verify the problem, but, it comes down to the mindset. If the goal is to make the players happy and the game more fun, then you can't just turn around and say "yeah we see what you're complaining about but that's working as intended" (burn patch comes to mind). I think the devs are more inclined to follow their vision rather than make the game more fun. I think you can see that evident in I4.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can you show an example of where player feedback has changed the devs minds? I can't think of any. Datamining has changed their minds for sure ( and possbily datamining AND feedback). For me the tell is exactly what Cuppa said "The Devs are happy with the changes".

Apparently at Cryptic, the theory is the customer must have ordered the wrong thing- they KNOW what you want, regardless of what you want.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tanker complaints about the Pool Power Provoke, for one. Scrapper complaints about not having a use in groups, for another. (Which got criticals added). Changes to Martial Arts animation times. Dark Armor and Stone Armor now stacking, as well as the new look to Stone Armor. There was an issue on the Test Server where the Dev's had added Knockback to one of the Tanker Powers (A super strength power, I believe) and the Tankers had quite a few negative things to say to it, which led to the new Knockdown/Knockback system being added instead.

Those are just off the top of my head.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's see, add the roll-back on the boss changes after I3 and making Unyielding Stance no longer root you in place. Oh, and while some people don't like suppression, even more didn't like the ACC debuff they put in with I4 so they changed it (Yes, this is still being debated but the fact is that more people disliked the -ACC so they changed it). I believe making the end drain done by Defenders more than that of Blasters was also a response to a need brought up by the community.

Also the TF exemplar that is in test now is the result of repeated calls for a "flashback" option to let people play missions they outleveled.

[/ QUOTE ]

I forget where but I read one of the devs state that the -acc on the travel powers screwed up PvP- which is why it was removed. Stateman stated somewhere on the forum that the boss changes were rolled back AFTER it went live and the datamined numbers came back. If the devs were listening to complaints it wouldn't have left the test server. Statesman made it explicit in this this post that they explicitly do not use complaints as a basis for making a change. At best the "opinions" are simply a basis for looking at the data. If they were listened to feedback I4 wouldn't have gone live in the condition it did.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

How can you say a support AT is being "penalized" for not doing damage? You ain't supporting you team much if you are back 300 feet munching on Cheetos.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno... other day I'm on a mish and it's for a buddy who needs a controller to help handle mobs that are wiping out his entire team of 7 repeatedly. I get there and I'm sleeping, Holding, Terror and Mass Confusing everything in sight due to the number of villian groups all tightly packed.

Even with terror I do minimal damage to mass groups - I died like 3-4 times just trying to be everywhere at once. Granted they were playing like idiots and told them all so - but for my efforts to get them through the mish and complete it ... I got tons more debt than I ever recieved in XP.

I was in no way shape or form "munching on cheetos" - and my view is that thanks to the changes now out there I usually make more points soloing than I do with groups.

Here's why:

1) You can't garrantee that on your server there are people in your range who can team with you when you're playing. So you take the teams you get offered as an MC, not the ones you want to be on.

2) The lvl spread will force you to exempt or SK someone - usually outside your range. One of you - will not get the pts you deserve if you play your hardest.

3) It really hasn't stopped power leveling in the least - I still see swarms of lower levels in PI, and the Ferry from Talos to PI is still packed with even level 1s standing around going "Hey buddy can you spare a level???".

They may be happy with the changes - but what this has done to teaming is damage that will continue for a long time. My SG is having serious issues because the new people we bring in ... can't play with the more experienced ones, can't learn squat from them - without being penalized.

I'm sorry the answer was to put a level barrier on the upper zones ... not mess with the XP system. It would have been easier to implement and not affected so many people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thus the solution for now is to PL until you can solo, then solo whenever possible. Personally I no longer do AV missions since I can't solo them. This apparenlty makes the devs happy.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can you show an example of where player feedback has changed the devs minds? I can't think of any. Datamining has changed their minds for sure ( and possbily datamining AND feedback). For me the tell is exactly what Cuppa said "The Devs are happy with the changes".

Apparently at Cryptic, the theory is the customer must have ordered the wrong thing- they KNOW what you want, regardless of what you want.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tanker complaints about the Pool Power Provoke, for one. Scrapper complaints about not having a use in groups, for another. (Which got criticals added). Changes to Martial Arts animation times. Dark Armor and Stone Armor now stacking, as well as the new look to Stone Armor. There was an issue on the Test Server where the Dev's had added Knockback to one of the Tanker Powers (A super strength power, I believe) and the Tankers had quite a few negative things to say to it, which led to the new Knockdown/Knockback system being added instead.

Those are just off the top of my head.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't find any of those that didn't get datamined to the devs satisfaction first before the change. So at best the change was made after players called attention to something that wasn't working as the devs intended.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Since the devs don't seem to pay any attention to thousands of messages with negative feedback about ongoing nerfs, one can only wonder why they would ask. How they could continue nerfing everything when they get all this negative feedback, on top of the simple FACT hardly anyone uses the Arena anyway... One can only wonder. Maybe the devs have Guildwars and CoH teams mixing up feedback or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

just gonna ignore the times that player feedback has actually made them change their minds huh...or when player datamining has led to a re-evaluation.
Wait a minute, why am I even bothering. I could throw all the logic in the world at you people and you'd still moan and complain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you show an example of where player feedback has changed the devs minds? I can't think of any. Datamining has changed their minds for sure ( and possbily datamining AND feedback). For me the tell is exactly what Cuppa said "The Devs are happy with the changes".

Apparently at Cryptic, the theory is the customer must have ordered the wrong thing- they KNOW what you want, regardless of what you want.

[ QUOTE ]
Miosane,

[ QUOTE ]
...with the experience range if you are in a team and they are outside the experience range(i.e. not getting anything) the experience drop for your teammates are still there why is that?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is, I assume, to prevent one member of the team from breaking away from his/her teammates and getting better XP as a result.

NewScrapper

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is why the smart players (if hunting) are not teaming up.

[ QUOTE ]
The "tell me how to play" argument is not valid and always pops up when someone doesn't like a change. It is cause and effect. Let people PL, makes team make-up different and effects peoples play, ways around it and ways to avoid it but now you are telling ME how to play, take it away and telling YOU how to play. Welcome to the real world, not a slam just the way it is as you can see from ONE of MY experiences below.


[/ QUOTE ] Your logic is flawed- you can't tell me that someone is telling you what to do by not telling you what to do...but lets see...[ QUOTE ]

Someone will not like the changes, the INV changes to scrappers changed the whole ballgame for me. Didn't like it, but still love and playmy scrapper.


[/ QUOTE ]This was a power change. This did not changes the underlying rules of the game. Your strategy might have to change but you cn always choose to respec and drop that power. You can even delete that char and build another if you don't like the way it works. If they suddently forced you to only play an INV scrapper you might have a comparison[ QUOTE ]

Content I understand, I personally would love to see more random events in mission such as booby traps, massive ambuses(could trip an alarm and all mobs come for you) as well as more content in general. This would cause just as many people to yell about debt, forced teaming and many more, but like the risk/reward/challenge potential.

I still see more against PL then for personally. Unless someone comes up with a better solution it appears they will keep trying to put it in check and will have to be a solid solution not a I like it not hurting anyone arguement imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

the only folks that have a big problem with it is the devs. Players already have a solution for unwanted tells and broadcasts- /ignore

the argument that somehow PLing causes crappy teammates is, in general, silly unless you are making the assumption that all NON plers are great teammates- and that is just not so.

[ QUOTE ]
Have not PL'd nor plan too. Have plenty of friends I SK to and they Exemp down don't feel like I am losing anything or not contributing. Also, most in our SG/friends have alts of various levels and don't know how many times even in pick-up groups it is have an alt at this level or that.

Personally if someone wants to PL I do not care, what I do care about are the constant calls to PL, the PLers who are new to the game in pick-up groups at higher levels, etc.

Don't think it will be that hard to nerf PLer's and have little effect on SK's PLers are space takers not contributers to a team and the current changes are not bothering me.

Are their going to be exceptions? There always is, but that is the nature of the beast, just don't see a mass exodus of players if it is harder to PL. On the boards and in game in my experience PLers are not going to be missed.

A middle ground solution to the issue to me would be to do something like give a slot or two that a char can be created up to the highest level char currently developed. Lets the veterans skip content if wanted, but still make newer players have to learn the game(hopefully).

[/ QUOTE ]

Remember that this change does not affect Powerlevelers in any significant way, this really only affects non-PLers (cause most PLing happens in missions)

[ QUOTE ]
OK - it's been like YEARS since I've had to write a batch file or do DOS commands (I used to be really good at it, too). So I need a little help with an alteration I'd like to make to this batch file....if it is possible. (I'm beginning to think it's not - I've looked thru my reference manuals and can't find an answer.)

What I'd like to do is change the sleep 1 command so that instead of going thru the file and each line every second, I'd like it to step thru it sequentially. Meaning - I'd like the batch file to go to the next line after every keypress instead of after every second.

I have like 40 battlecries on 1 character. The problem with the timed version of this batch file is that I have really good timing - I keep getting the same battlecry like 3 times in a row...or 3 or 4 times every other battlecry. I don't want it to repeat anything in the list until it has actually gone thru the list.

Anyone think this is possible? A stepped version of the batch file instead of the timed one?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't do that via the CMD prompt since it requires interaction from COH. The good news is that you can get the same effect from within COH. Check this post for details:
Re: The Incomplete and Unofficial Guide to /bind (1.1) 05/09/04 12:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The "leash" is an annoying attempt to check part of this, whatever it's successes are. I want to find ways to attack the root of what the devs find problematic. To me, PLing is a symptom of a lethal disease in an MMORPG- if untreated, the game suffers and dies. I enjoy CoH. I don't want it to become a victim of PLing, even if PLing will always exist to an extent. People will always find ways to enhance their character growth. I don't want that turning into a cancer. Cancers are unchecked and malignant things, after all. PLing should end up neither.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree. This post by Great_Scott is a good arguement why: #2925727 - 05/24/05 12:57 PM


[/ QUOTE ]

The "type 2" PL'er also damages the game. How, you ask does it do so? Let me explain.

If you have to level your character up without PLing, you not only gain experience playing it, but you ALSO improve the game of those you play with by example. Where is this needed most?

At the very self-same pre-32 levels you see "Type 2" players trying to avoid. Heck, you're a veteran player, you WILL level up faster. Even with bridging out of the picture, you can still sit there and suck up +9 level exp....if you're actually 9 levels below the mobs. You just can't sit there in PI at level 1 while someone bridges you to a Dreck mission.


[/ QUOTE ]
This still makes no sense- I think you are trying to say that players that already know how to play provide some sort of service by being an example to other players. To a slight extent I can see that - especially to members of your own SG ,but as far as strangers go, I think they would simply quit a crappy team rather than try to explain to the rest what they are doing wrong. If there are other points in there, I'm just not getting them.
[ QUOTE ]

Treat the disease. It's incurable- as many people have noted, PLing is impossible to eradicate. But powerleveling also steals something important from the game- having veterans mixed in with the newbies, trying new things and leading by example. Instead, we have those vets begging for PL's in Peregrine Island. That means each wave of new high-level players will be poorer in skill for having had to blunder their way to the top. I mean, look at what kind of massive flaws of a build we got courtesy of the ultimate PL event, Winter Lords. To a lesser extent, "Type 2" PLers are causing that today. All it takes is no longer caring about what happens in the early stages of the game.


[/ QUOTE ] so making a crappy char or playing poorly is OK as long as you endured a grind for a long time to make them? I think not. I think they are easier to absorb into the game, but crappy chars. are crappy chars. whether it takes 3 months or 2 weeks. Generally speaking, it's not the vets (who by that time have made some friends and have no need to beg) that are begging, it's newbies desperate that the game won't be as tedious if they get a few more powers.[ QUOTE ]

Apathy leads to neglect. Neglect causes game quality to decline in the early levels. Poorer early game means fewer people come to play and stay. And new players are the lifeblood of an MMORPG. The less appealing that first experience becomes, the worse CoH becomes in turn.


[/ QUOTE ]
exactly , when I started playing city of heroes I had a fun time. Forming a team was fun. In my day we had heroes with superpowers and it was fun to play a superhero. Little did I know that the game would evolve into avoiding the latest nerf or that (even though the included manual stated that some ATs were weaker than others) all the ATs would be "equalized" with the nerfbat[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we all would have liked to have seen new content in i4 but it wasn't slated to be- would that have helped the PL issue? Nope, but we got lots of nerfs!

[/ QUOTE ]

We got an issue devoted to narrow content, and in a sense I think it wasn't an issue so much as it was the alpha testing for CoV. CoH certainly feels that way right now, with the crashy lag fun we're all getting to enjoy these days. :P

[ QUOTE ]
I like the idea of my SK being able to contribute well to any team, not feeling gimped because I'm barely high enough, and as a result, he isn't. That it prevents bridging to me is a great boon as well.


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what you mean

[/ QUOTE ]

If I have to sidekick to a level 46 in a level 50 mission, I am level 45 (or worse, depending on level)under the current system. That means I am minimally able to deal with the mobs, who are even tougher to me than the +6 or worse they are to my mentor.

If SKing made my level relate to the top dog, that L50 leading the mission, I'm instead 49th or so- not quite as effective as a real one, but I'm certainly at a point where I can -actively- contribute to a team. In fact, the -worst- I could be is 46th.

I think we all agree that a level 46 player can reasonably contribute on a level 50 mission, right? Sidekicking this way would always make sidekicks a worthy level for the team, rather than a potential gimp-in-the-making if you're forced to SK to the low man on the level totem pole.


[/ QUOTE ] Ahh so you want to vitually guarantee that no-one wants a high level char on the team since that will screw up all the SKs- Brilliant! So much for vets helping the newbies.
[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Doing nothing to get +9 arrest exp isn't playing. It's sitting there drooling on your keyboard listening to the levels pile up and taking progressive screenshots of the "level up!" flashes.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So what? if that's what someone finds fun isn't that why they pay? I wonder if you understand the issue. No one I am aware of has said that PLing is the best way to play. The problem isn't that they are doing something about PLing, it's the fact that the Devs are now changing core rules in order to dictate how players play the game. It's as if you are playing checkers and, halfway through the game, about to triple jump your opponent and he says "Sorry you can't do that, that's too quick to beating me. No more triple jumps". If the game just came out, I could see something like this. It's been a year, so they can't say it was somehow missed in testing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once upon a time, my EQ character would have been considered insane by someone who only played the first year. You can't go over level 50, nobody can! What's an "AA"?

Games change. Sometimes radically, but almost always due to players. If there is a change to PLing, it's part of the give and take any dev team has to do while building a game- which in MMORPG's is a constant. None remain truly stable, most end up with serious alterations to play.

And "because it is fun" isn't always a good argument. I've known people who consider training large numbers of monsters on people trying to play as "fun". It got changed.

After all, bad things can happen even if someone considers it fun and the game allows it. This leads to change.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right- the actions you can do to other players should be regulated. The Devs have decided instead that the choices you make on how to play should be regulated. Next they'll be telling us which archtypes are "available" to play- after all you wouldn't want a game with too many scappers and not enough controllers. As far as games changing go- I'd be OK with it if didn't change just a few months ago!! The devs can't be dealing honestly with us if they tell us that it took you a year to figure out how to deal with XP! Unless there never was a real plan.

The challenge of game design is trying to create a world with an internal set of rules that draws you in to try to make sense of how they work. This change doesn't draw anyone in.

[ QUOTE ]

I agree. That's why I'd like to see other options instead. The issue seems to be that in whatever way you want to look at it, Statesman feels that people are finding a way to gain exp at a rate no hero that level naturally would, usually by bypassing part of the game entirely without any risk to their gains.

The "leash" is an annoying attempt to check part of this, whatever it's successes are. I want to find ways to attack the root of what the devs find problematic. To me, PLing is a symptom of a lethal disease in an MMORPG- if untreated, the game suffers and dies. I enjoy CoH. I don't want it to become a victim of PLing, even if PLing will always exist to an extent. People will always find ways to enhance their character growth. I don't want that turning into a cancer. Cancers are unchecked and malignant things, after all. PLing should end up neither.


[/ QUOTE ] I disagree. This post by Great_Scott is a good arguement why: #2925727 - 05/24/05 12:57 PM
[ QUOTE ]

I like the idea of having hunters come after me in higher-level zones. Not only are these ways to point out a zone is designed for tougher heroes, but if I want a tougher challenge myself, I can hunt the hunters- if I'm tough enough myself.


[/ QUOTE ]I think we all would have liked to have seen new content in i4 but it wasn't slated to be- would that have helped the PL issue? Nope, but we got lots of nerfs!
[ QUOTE ]

I like the idea of my SK being able to contribute well to any team, not feeling gimped because I'm barely high enough, and as a result, he isn't. That it prevents bridging to me is a great boon as well.


[/ QUOTE ] I'm not sure what you mean
[ QUOTE ]

Doing nothing to get +9 arrest exp isn't playing. It's sitting there drooling on your keyboard listening to the levels pile up and taking progressive screenshots of the "level up!" flashes.

[/ QUOTE ]So what? if that's what someone finds fun isn't that why they pay? I wonder if you understand the issue. No one I am aware of has said that PLing is the best way to play. The problem isn't that they are doing something about PLing, it's the fact that the Devs are now changing core rules in order to dictate how players play the game. It's as if you are playing checkers and, halfway through the game, about to triple jump your opponent and he says "Sorry you can't do that, that's too quick to beating me. No more triple jumps". If the game just came out, I could see something like this. It's been a year, so they can't say it was somehow missed in testing.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

When large portions of your subscribers skip everything under level 40, why bother making more content for the lower levels?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because with the exemplar feature (or better yet, flashback or content with an auto-exemplar feature), all new content is available to high levels as well.

I would like to have a new level 50 trial. But a level 14-20 Faultline trial would be almost as good...it would still give my 50s something to do.

Hmm, this thread is getting off topic. I don't think the XP range changes have made much of an impact on live, positive or negative. There's no one standing at the trams leveling up (real PLing takes place in missions, just like it always has), but on TFs with outdoor hunt missions I get screwed out of some XP. Not much difference really.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pardon my devil's advocate here.

OK, I've done the content from the lower levels. I'm 50 and I'm bored beating Hamidon all day.

More content please!

Multiply this by a good chunk, and you start getting problems. Exemplaring or not, people want to advance. To use the fullest abilities available to their character. To expand those abilities.

Once you're there at the top, coming down isn't something you want to do 24-7, is it? Nah. So you ask for higher level content to match your level. Shadow Shard respecs. More epic encounters. And so on.

It's good to have lots on the way, but PLing means people's desires for content is based on what their current, pumped up levels will be....not what's below them. As you said- you'd rather have level 50 content than level 15 content.


[/ QUOTE ]
This is based on the faulty assumption that the lvl 50 mission is somehow superior to the level 15 mission. If it was there wouldn't be a call for the "flashback" option.
[ QUOTE ]

Well, if people are cheerfully skipping those levels and content with PLing, you'll have plenty more company soon. Flashbacks and exemplaring are wonderful things, but in most cases, people leveling through a PL are trying to skip those in order to hit the "good stuff", which they equate to as high a level content as they can experience. They want to be "uber", and do the "uber" stuff.


[/ QUOTE ] the only "uber" thing in this game is hamidon- and where the only uber loot is ( hami-os)[ QUOTE ]

Personally, I'd be happy to see low-level mobs all over high level zones, sniper-perception and range, ready to fill under-leveled newbies in PI or FF or Bricks full of lead. I'd like to see SK'ed players leveled up to the point of not being able to bridge +9 arrests.

Maybe then an "exp range" wouldn't be considered needed. It's explicitly put in the game to act as an obstacle to PLing, and if there's a better solution, perhaps the leash shouldn't be there.

[/ QUOTE ]
If this was put in to stop PLing, it is about as effective as the bug on my windshield was at slowing down my car (which is to say, none at all). But like the bug on my windshield, its an unneeded annoyance.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, bad call by the leader, but his intention WAS to P/L the warshade and blaster. He knew what he was doing, they were SG members with him. I am sure he knew that even if the mission was not completely finished, just as if it was the Dreck mission or Warwolves, that the P/L objective would be done.

The results were:
Two 45+ chars got lots and lots of debt, not uncommon, not even new, but debt.


[/ QUOTE ]
And if you were opposed to how things were going- what was your response? You apparenlty neither quit nor voiced your concern to the team leader.
[ QUOTE ]

The warshade only got benefit while harming the rest of the team, he leveled once, and based on the mobs size, probably got close again. He did not contribute, yet received reward

[/ QUOTE ]
You said previously that he did use his powers to attack. It seems like what you are saying is that you don't like sidekicking. You may not have liked his contributions, which were to increase mob size and help beat mobs, but in fact you say i na prior post that he did contribute. The only "harm" the rest of the team endured was in having a teammate that, by your own account, didn't want to be there, and yet still hung around to work the mobs and get the XP.

I don't consider sidekicking PLing although I can see how some would view it that way.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Still confused about one point: if (for example) you've got a three person team, each person on the team is 400' away from each other person, and person X defeats a bad guy -- does person X get "solo XP" or XP for being on a 3 person team?



[/ QUOTE ]

He'd get XP with the 3 person team multiplier...BUT that XP would still be divided appropriately between each teammate. The others, however, wouldn't receive their shares.

[/ QUOTE ]
Doesn't this seem a tad unfair? Are we supposed to not want to team?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, you're not supposed to "not want to team". You're supposed to actually work as a team when you are teamed. This means, instead of everyone splitting up and solo'ing to benefit from the team multiplier and your teammates kills, you are encouraged to stay togethor. Basically, if you want to solo, solo. If you want to group with other human beings, you will need to actually group with them to benefit from their defeats.

[/ QUOTE ]
Right. Thanks to the XP leash the only incentive I have to team, rather than solo outdoors, is when I play my controller and have to team to complete those kill ## villans. Soloing outdoors is far superior now to teaming. You are right- you are not supposed to "not want to team", but that certainly is the effect both predicted and , it seems , exhibited.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your logic is flawed. If the devs are going to do this (and I have to agree that is will happen, since I believe the devs have no interest in any playtesting other than seeing if the code works as they plan). There is no point in attempting to find the "holes" since the entire concept is far worse than whatever holes are created.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with you. This statement on the Regen thread is why.


[/ QUOTE ]While that is clearly stated, I am unaware of any change since issue 2 that has been plainly stated as a bad idea by what (at least to me) seemed a majority of posters (at least) were not in favor of and removed as a result. I'll believe it when I see it. I would believe it more if you ( or anyone) can point to a couple or recalled changes (not tweaks)

[/ QUOTE ]

Just incase there are those here that have not checked the Official Regen thread in the last few days (which is now locked by the way) the regen nerf for I4 has been cut. They have decided that their testing was not what it needed to be and will be redoing their testing.

Statesman on Official Regen Nerf now a locked thread.



[/ QUOTE ]

from the post by Statesman cited:
[ QUOTE ]
A bug disabled the damage combat modifiers in one of our testing branches.

Result? Scrappers (and all Archetypes) were doing more damage to higher level mobs than they should have. I should note that this is on our internal Testing Server only - not the Training Room.

[/ QUOTE ]

So this wasn't a case where the change was wrong (a bad idea) and retracted, it a case of the code didn't work. Yet another proof of my statement. Test is for testing code, not for testing changes.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
While that is clearly stated, I am unaware of any change since issue 2 that has been plainly stated as a bad idea by what (at least to me) seemed a majority of posters (at least) were not in favor of and removed as a result. I'll believe it when I see it. I would believe it more if you ( or anyone) can point to a couple or recalled changes (not tweaks)

[/ QUOTE ]

This one's dirt simple. The patch that boosted 25+ level bosses. It was rolled back to pre-patch after squishy AT's complained en masse about the massive difficulty boost this produced (though as a slider option, maybe it'd give some of the non-squishy types a challenge). If you didn't call that a major change, you weren't one of the folks faceplanting repeatedly trying to do missions.



[/ QUOTE ]
Actually that's an example of what I am talking about. There is a pre-live thread here So much for the promise that all can solo ( i think) and here is the thread post-live Petition: Roll back boss hp and damage increases. The devs wer told it was bad- did it anyway- and were forced to roll it back showing to me that test was for testing code, not testing a change.
[ QUOTE ]

I think powerleveling is a problem from my experiences elsewhere on MMORPG's. I've been "uber". I've done my share of the big stuff on other games- raiding, camping the uber mobs, keying for areas. I've seen what happens when a playerbase shoves their way to the top and then expects everything new to show up there. It creates immense pressure to focus all development on the top levels of the game and "benign neglect" of the lower level ones. The game becomes intensely top-heavy, and PLing stops being a choice, but a need if you want to "escape" to the fun part of the game.
That demand kills games.

[/ QUOTE ] As far as I know, COH is the only game that allows you to "go back" by exemping and doing any pre-endgame content. This seemed to work for Striga. I noticed alot of 45-50 chars. in that area when it opened.

[ QUOTE ]
The #1 reason a change should be made is because it makes the game more fun. I haven't seen anyone argue that somehow this change makes the game more fun. [ QUOTE ]

Agreed. This change makes the game -less- fun. That's why I suggested an alternative myself.


[/ QUOTE ]
But I would disagree that development time needs to be wasted on changing the XP system at all