Frosticus

If it works on existing 50 content then it would seem that there would be ample content to introduce the first tier. Just TF's alone for someone who put themselves into a rogue/vig status would occupy a heap of hours of play. If you include all of the arcs that are playable as a 50 there are hundreds of hours of content.

At the rate they have been producing content in the last couple years I have no faith that there will be ample content if incarnate levels are only functional in some new 50+ content.

At the same time there would be significant balance concerns (assuming they are decently strong) if you can use the incarnate stuff on existing 50 content.

These are of course the predictable problems that arise when you want to raise the power ceiling and it is why most designers choose to just raise the level cap rather than utilize a convoluted pseudo-level cap increase.

There are two scenarios as I see it.
1. You can use incarnate levels on existing 50 content and decimate the game.
2. You can only use incarnate levels on new content that is designed for them.

If it is the first then they seem to be throwing balance out the window. If it is the second then there is little functional difference between the system they are choosing and simply increasing the level cap to 60.

My gut would suggest that forum goers are more likely to use hide, but I have absolutely no concrete evidence to support that, just speculations.
-we are more knowledgeable about the game and might be more inclined to solo
-we know more of the global channels thus removing our need to be a part of the larger and less organized system
-we have access to more organized events/teams and subgroups

Whether any of that translates to any sort of statistically significant difference I have no idea

I always have builds i'm willing to share. It isn't quite as meaty as the one you posted though, but it is just shy of perma pets. It is also pretty expensive (though not as expensive as the version that uses assault instead of manuevers and needs the pvp +3%). It also has no crowd control which is sadness.

You mean people had /hide turned off in real life?

If this is accurate then I'm embarrassed for whoever thought it would be a good idea to include the first Incarnate slot with GR.

That is way worse than if the first level just wasn't up to snuff. It shows once again that they just don't get it.

I think if/when the day comes they will reduce containment to 50% rather than 100%. They already have in pvp...

You sure do make a habit of being wrong. Linking to a post where you are further wrong is an interesting tactic though. Not new by any means, but interesting.

I'm not sure why you think linking to Arcana's explanation of some of the unique powers of illusion supports what you are saying. That is still a mystery to me. I doubt she would agree with your conclusion because if she does then she is wrong too and she is rarely wrong largely in part because she doesn't take risks with statements.

I question if you have ever played a dominator based on your statement about building domination. Actually I question everything you are saying because it is all false.

Additionally we have this on record:
from:http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=219650

Interestingly enough Je Saist, this was already explained to you a couple months ago. Have you forgotten or just chosen to ignore when people prove you wrong?

I suppose a more specific degree of hide status is required. My statement was with regard to people that are hidden from everything. Ya there is a chance they might respond to an open call I put out in x channel and I suppose there is a chance they might randomly invite me as well (unless I too am in hide)...But they are irrelevant for anyone using the default tools in most cases. And on that note we have already determined that people "in the know" that access server specific channels and such don't really care that much about the population because there is always a few warm bodies around. In addition knowledgeable people have a greater understanding of the how and why you may rarely see players running about.

He seems to be accounting for this judging by his question of whether it would be fair to suggest that people online represent roughly 10% of the people playing over the period (ie over the day, week, month; depending on how long you run the analysis). The accuracy of that assessment is difficult though. It's also why he was seeking the time slot that might give the highest numbers. Running the numbers at 3 am would probably suggest that the game is beyond dead. Granted running it only at prime time gives an inflated representation too...

If someone really wanted to do this task I would suggest:
-monitoring servers around the clock and taking hourly snapshots
-find some way to reasonably determine the average percentage hiding from searches
-find some way to reasonably determine the relationship between people online and subscriptions (ie is 10% reasonable?)
-perform math fu
-post results

To much work for me to determine something I already know. That this game is way less populated than I'd like it to be. But I wish him luck in the process.

I don't have the answer. I've heard people postulate estimates that hover around the half way mark of the numbers I just threw out. I can't say they are wrong because as you are pointing out the numbers don't add up to anything very optimistic.

At the same time though it makes no sense that this game would be getting significant developer attention if it was anywhere near as bleak as you may be entertaining.

There is another theory that satisfactorily explains how the population could be very very low and the game would still receive developer attention. It's a theory that I'm actually hopeful for and that GR isn't some last ditch effort to revive the game.

They have hired a lot of people. A lot of people, but not a lot is being produced. I theorize that a lot of those people are working on coh2. Now this isn't a unique, or even a novel theory. However, I'll use this theory to explain what we are seeing with CoX, which is something I haven't seen anyone do.

Simply put they are continuing to develop for this game because they don't want it to wither up into a stinky puss bag before coh2 is ready to be pushed. Even if this game is practically barren when coh2 is ready to be pushed they can still cite all of the accomplishments of CoX (which are numerous). However, if at that time they had let CoX fester and die then referencing that game to build credit for coh2 would be a bad idea. Imagine; "from the makers of cox comes coh2!". "oh you mean that game that had 6 people playing it at the end and hadn't been updated for over a year before it went offline?" "ya, no thx". If they however keep CoX going even if it is losing money (heaven forbid) they can proudly use it as a reference to their abilities and quality regardless of how many people are playing it when coh2 is ready to go.

Anyway, that is about the only way I can explain what is going on

Ya I figured as much. Population analysis won't get you the answers you want though. Just as an example I have a feeling there are a lot of people like me that sub to this game but rarely play it anymore.

Any data you attempt to extrapolate into representative numbers will have huge deviation. The best approach we have right now is using the financial information. That too has a lot of guesswork because of multiple revenue streams. But if all you are concerned about is the game keeping its doors open you should be able to make some reasonable assessments of their revenue vs the expected expenditures for that period.

I'll tell you what I think. The game has dipped below 80k subs. Maybe even below 70k. I'm just hopeful they have managed their expectations with regard to GR and aren't expecting to to result in a major resurgence of the game. That would be unfortunate.

Most AV's are just a single casting of your tier 1 immob away from giving you delicious double damage. There are of course a couple trollers that can't do that. Illusion doesn't care tbh it still kills faster than any def and mind is left out. At the same time though not all defs have a t3 attack.

Immobing an AV also opens up other damage sources that they might normally reduce such as nado+LS (generally have enough mag afraid to send AV's fleeing), or making them sit in OSA for the duration.

I think we are largely in agreement though. Containment is very easy to establish in most scenarios. Once established a controller will deal base ~180 damage over three attacks and a defender will deal ~170. Aim (if available) and better debuffs don't make up for pets. At least not the more damage oriented pets like illusion, fire, earth, or ice.

I'll gladly draw up some dps assessments, but I don't want to do it for many of them so if you want to select a couple defs and couple troller attack sets I'll run it.

I dunno, but I've got a stable of AV killers, I'd never make a defender over a troller for the task from a pure kill-speed perspective. If/when the animations of traps get fixed then maybe, but hopefully trollers will have the set by then, at which point a traps AV spec'd troller will be > traps def.

I'd be very impressed if any defender could kill single targets HALF as fast as my ill/cold/ice troller. Honestly. It will only get worse when sleet is fixed too as I'll gain even more force-multiplication of my various damage sources.

Trollers aren't exactly weak damage dealers themselves. Most can establish containment quite easily on most targets at which point they have 3 attacks (ie.hold, immob, epic blast) that deal 60 base damage. That is as good as any defender's options when you add up the t1,2,3. Trollers that slot for damage actually do pretty decent.

Trollers are a insanely strong. You could probably take away containment and they'd still be better than they likely should be relative to the benefits they have.
So true. It is ridiculous actually.
I agree. Trollers tend to be pretty tight.

What aspect of the power are you trying to improve?

If there is anyone that has a chance of collecting the data and having people actually pay attention to the results you are one of the best candidates for the job Bill.

So was I. Of the three toons I listed they all have the ability to run indefinitely if built properly. The dom and the bane both have the ability to nudge up against 400dps+/- and that is all raw damage, no -regen.

The ill/cold is just a freak of nature that I'm just waiting for a perfect run to drop an AV in less than 2 mins (will easily hit this mark if Freezing rain ever gets fixed) and have already broken the 2 min mark on pylons.

Anything you want to build that is going to be shattering benchmarks is going to cost a lot of inf. If you are hoping to just pick up some SO'd toon and 'break the game' you will probably fall short because if that was an option it would have already been nerfed.

You may have missed where I mentioned fire/fire/mace dom and mace app Bane. They are "surprise" AT's that can decimate the damage output of /shield scrappers, or fire/elec blasters, or any other commonly thought of "super" damage toons. Unfortunately their extreme output is fairly situational.

I think the population of the game proves you incorrect. I also don't think you know enough about advertising to be spearheading the discussion demonstrated by how quickly you have resorted to attacking other posters and your reliance upon parroting.

I don't think anyone has any hope of having an actual discussion with you on this material. Well, if your capslock key gets fixed we might be able to take it really slow, but it is doubtful.

I'd actually be impressed if it hit 7500 tbh.

I wouldn't mind you posting it at all, but I always take an interest when other people post the info too.

A fun exercise would be to take the numbers you get and then divide it by the square mileage available for each sides population. Just to give a relative density analysis. Of course we know that folks concentrate around certain areas, but it would still be neat.

I have a feeling it would about the equivalent of standing out in the Rocky Mountains.

That said, unless you are interested in doing this task don't have any expectations of it proving anything to anyone. People that recognize the state of the population already recognize it. The people that don't simply refuse to take the blinders off and it is doubtful the data you gather will open their eyes.