GadgetDon

[ QUOTE ]
Except they threw that out of whack with the stf.

The stf can be completed in less time than the posi tf.

That right there says right now the way tfs are viewed by the dev team is basically borked. I don't think tfs are hardcore at all.

Just some being ridiculously and unnecssarily tedious.

And I'm sorry but tediousness for tediousnes sake is NOT challange as far as I'm concerned.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know Positron has said that they aren't happy with the Positron TF and I think the other Freedom Phalanx TFs have turned out, there was a discussion about it, the issue is finding the time to redo it. I do think that the devs think that the goal should be more like the Hess or Lady Grey TF, they just haven't been able to redo the old content.

Maybe that's a good way to bring the new hires up to speed on the system...revamping the old content.

[ QUOTE ]
The thing is that TFs/SFs have fallen victim to skewed player perspective.

They have never been intended to be easy or fast, or for the average PUG. They are content for hardcore players willing and able to run for 4-8 hours at once, or to reorganize on a regular basis: content for teams of RL friends or SGs.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that was the intent, well, that's an even worse idea than this change. I'll grant that the STF is supposed to be hardcore. But most players aren't hardcore, the game isn't targetted at hardcore, the appeals of the game aren't the challenge it gives to hardcore players.

I'm sincerely hoping that isn't the devs vision of what TFs should be. And I'd say that the evolution of TFs suggests otherwise. We've gone from the grind of the Freedom Phalanx TFs and the Shard TFs to 5 fast-paced missions for the Lady Grey TF. CoV SFs are all much faster, much less "go defeat everyone in that base. Now do the exact same thing in two more identical bases" grind.

Yes, task forces take a commitment, and for that it's not going to be for everyone, and they aren't meant to be soloable. But based on later TFs, I think they're looking at 2-3 hours tops for most TFs.

You're also confusing "challenge" with "time spent". There are people who are very good at the game, but have problem with long time commitments. And there are people who an play for long stretches of time, but are only average in the level of challenge they can deal with. The STF is challenging (the Master of STF very so), but it's not a particularly long TF. If your team is able to deal with the challenges presented, you can get it done in a couple hours. The long STF runs are from team wipes and shivan runs and inspiration runs trying to find a way to beat specific issues (mostly ghost widow).

[ QUOTE ]
Suggestion:

Since this is being done because of an exploit could we not change the spawn sizes so that it can tell the difference between people that are logged off and people that have quit?

[/ QUOTE ]

While that would be better...sometimes people don't quit before they leave the TF, never to return. Sometimes their internet connection goes out for a few hours, sometimes their computer crashes hard, won't reboot, and they decide to get some sleep because it'll be too late, sometimes the magic smoke comes out of the computer.

And there are legitimate reasons to logging out with an intent to return. "Aw, damn, I just got an emergency call, I need to get someone from the airport. I think it'll be about 90 minutes, so I'll be back before the end."

BTW, people are listing LGTF as requiring 8 people. As I recall, it was reduced to 6 in I10 beta testing, though the text was never updated. To the best of my knowledge, it's still 6 (though with all the things that didn't make it into the patch notes, who knows?).

I managed to sneak in twice (once on a villain and when I left the test server, it seemed spaces for villains were gone begging). Clearly a lot of work went into it.

But even granting the need to limit people, the method of limiting was way too chaotic. As SwordOfJustice, I saw utter chaos in Atlas Park, and thought it was unlikely I'd get in. But I took a shot on Atlas Park 3, turned out there were only a half dozen people near the usher, and I got in easily and quickly when the next item started. Then as Errand, so much fewer people there, so people got in without much angst.

The live event...I'm not sure what we got out of the live event, as opposed to the characters scripted with the behavior. The dialog was written ahead of time (as one would expect, for an event repeated multiple times). The only improvisation I saw was when Manticore and Sister Psyche disconnected...and as amusing as it was to see Back Alley Brawler break into the old softshoe and War Witch had some nice brief lines, I'd rather have had the events take place. An instanced event, as a followup to the "collect the gifts" mission, would have much of the same feel, everyone could have participated.

Maybe it's time for a discussion thread (not this one) about what all needs fixing about task forces/strike forces/trials? The only good thing this change may accomplish is pay attention to other things that need doing. The need to replace people who drop, the unrealistic minimum numbers, the the problems with tfs blueside and shortage redside, and bugs (tech in LRSF, a number in Eden, and elsewhere).

[ QUOTE ]

example of lengthy SF: Lady Grey Task Force. A mild trim to that SF wouldn't hurt.

SF that requires to many to start: LGTF and RSF. I have complete both with less then 8 due to drop outs, including 2 seperate MoRSF runs with less then 8. Could the start up minimum become six instead for both these?

Fun factor: they are all are fun for me, some more then others of course.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lady Grey is a long SF? 5 missions, each unique? I'd happily point to it as an example of a great SF. One of the reasons it was so popular in the 35-44 group for heroes was that it was fun and reasonably fast. As opposed to Numina (35 missions, including 16 meaningless hunt missions in 16 different zones), Quarterfield (24 missions, many "defeat all"), and Sara Moore (15 missions, half defeat all).

Was, of course, the operative word, because they removed the ability to sidekick into it. In yet another change that didn't make it into the patch notes.

A question and some comments...

Some were reporting that if people were offline but not quit, the spawns would be based on people in the TF, offline or online. For example, a TF with minimum size of six starts with eight people, two people disconnect and don't come back. From what you are saying the spawn sizes should be based on six people, but some were saying that spawn sizes were the size you'd expect with eight people. Was this bad analysis of the situation, or is there an additional part to drop.

Second, I'm sorry, but after all this time, really key changes not making it into patch notes, it's just not acceptable anymore. This isn't "Oh, we found a problem with the damage done by a specific power and fixed it", this is a significant change to a key mechanic. It's not something that one programmer working on something failed to document, it's a change in the rules.

I'll take your word that it was left out, but that's not acceptable. It should have been in the patch notes when it hit test. Why? Because the discussion should have happened before it was pushed live.

Here's why, at least as this is done, it's a lousy change. Heroside, the biggest problem with TFs is that so many of them are an annoying soul-deadening grind. Point of Balance finally got all the shard TFs, and while they had moments of interest, it was lost in hours of tedium. They COULD be interesting TFs if someone spent a few hours editing them, removing the pointless "go do this a number of times for no reason other than I said so, oh and go back to Atlas Park and then back deep into the shard because clearly the only communications system available in Paragon city is carrier pigeon and you look like a good pigeon" parts. The first is the worst, and while it can easily be done by 4 people (pre patch) it has a minimum number of 8 people.

Because the shard TFs take so long and are less accessible to those who don't have flight, it can be hard to get a full team. Often, people have to resort to "please, someone join just so we can start this". But even if you have eight people who want to do it, real life interferes, and people leave. I could be mistaken, but I don't think any of the shard TFs ended with everyone they started with. But with this change, we'd be dealing with 8-person spawns full time.

In addition to the shard, most of the Freedom Phalanx TFs are overly long, repetitive. The problems with Positron TF are well documented elsewhere. And most can be done with teams smaller than the stated minimums, if it's a good team. Manticore certainly doesn't need 7 people.

What this change means is that if players have spent hours on a TF have some others leave (for real life emergencies, for computer problems, or just "this is boring I'm gone") may see all that time go down the drain if they can't handle the large group sizes.

I understand there's an exploit with the Cap Au Diable TF. There was a similar exploit with the redside respec for vines, and that was solved by having more vines grow as people appear. That seems like a good solution longterm, but it presumably isn't a fast fix.

There are two ways to make this change less painful to people who are playing by the rules. PLEASE consider one or both.

The first, heroside, is reduce the minimum team side for TFs. With the possible exception of the STF or LRSF, none should require more than six, and four should be the norm. Change the text, if necessary, to say that a larger number is suggested, but bring the minimums to what a good team should do.

The other solution is, instead of spawning for minimum TF requirement, make it minimum - 2, or make it 4 or minimum (whichever is smaller). Yes, it provides some opportunity for soft loading still, but it's a compromise between reducing the soft loading and keeping TFs (and SFs) as fun as possible.

But given the problems with TFs heroside and the paucity of SFs redside...making them less fun and more unforgiving seems like a really bad idea.

[ QUOTE ]
Not concerning the "Real Numbers" but forgot something in the patch notes:

"Welcome to Vanguard" Mission is broke, doesn't give any Inf/XP

[/ QUOTE ]

After last weekend, nope, it's been fixed. Yeah, it's kind of been fixed the way I fixed my cats, but it needed fixing as much as my cats needed fixing.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wish he'd answered the concern some of us have about the impact on prestige earning, with people reaching the influence penalty earlier.

[/ QUOTE ]

In Issue 12 (no release date yet, sorry), we are going to have you never dropping below 50% Inf. earn rate when in Supergroup mode. We will look at the impact of that change and base future alterations on that.

[/ QUOTE ]

EXCELLENT! Thank you! Consider my qualms quashed.

I wish he'd answered the concern some of us have about the impact on prestige earning, with people reaching the influence penalty earlier.

There's a new website, WeGame.com for hosting in game videos. They have a free video recorder that you can download. It can do all the work for uploading the videos to their site, but the recorded videos are straightforward .avi files which I've been able to edit in ULead Videostudion.

The current version has some problems recording sound, but the develoeprs are working on it. You can see my videos here

[ QUOTE ]
Oooh - can the Vault be made to provide LiveJournal/MySpace/etc., friendly summary type things like any of those *countless* personality test thingies do? You know, "Copy and past this for MySpace," "Copy and paste this for HTML," etc? That would rock socks (whatever that means).

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be very cool.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also about 1/4 baby new year missions are not completeable. As soon as you exit the cave with him he just runs off into the forrest never to be seen or heard from again. This seriously needs to be check. I know my team reseted like twice and it still kept happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just like last year. It's the same bug as the elevator bug that has been oft reported.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've only had this happen if the person he follows has any stealth. So, before you start walking away, make sure all stealth is off.

Also, as I recall, if everyone leaves the map and re-enters, he shows up in a defined place. I don't remember if it's outside the cave entrance or in the cave, but it was recoverable. (This year, I told my teams to be sure to have stealth turned off.)

I started a thread before I saw this. I really like the ski chalet, I really like the Father Time mission.

But I really hate the presents. They're antisocial, they discourage teaming, they encourage working in zones where you'll earn no XP, and they encourage leaving any spawned snowmen behind.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, even with MMs on a yellow, I don't think they can kill it. Sandy was running some numbers on that, but I don't know how it comes out. We can check that later.


[/ QUOTE ]

The intention of MMs on a yellow isn't to kill it. Most henchmen use ranged attacks (though I will send my Bruiser to a yellow because he does melee damage). The intention is to hold aggro so that you don't need brutes on them. Last night, we could have had the six brutes going 4-1-1 on three mitos while the back three yellow mitos are attacking an endless stream of henchmen.

Clearly, if someone has a choice between their level 50 MM and a level 50 non-MM, they should choose the latter. But many people, like me, either bring an MM or they can't come.

How much of the lag is the number of actors involved (player characters and MM henchmen) and how much is the environment? If we weren't slogging through water, would it make a difference?

OK, our villain raid failed. Not enough melee damage for the yellows, in part because of few brutes and fewer thermals for support and LOTS of MMs.

Had an idea. I think that two MMs could hold aggro on a Yellow. A team of six MMs and two kins could handle the back three yellows, leaving only three for the brutes to deal with. Might be worth trying if we're in a similar situation.

We had the hive filled at the start time, and a very quick smooth raid heroside on Saturday. Here's hoping the same happens tomorrow with the villains.

There was not a raid Wednesday evening. It's unclear if there will be enough interest on Saturday.

Also, there is supposed to be a Villain raid on Sunday, I hope we can get the people together for that.

[ QUOTE ]
Adapted Scrapper Teams:
(Need to mention again Newyorican's altered scrapper team method)
We've been having great success at altering the yellow mito teams makeup. Using 6 scrappers and 2 status buffers (one a healer), and assigning 4 scrappers to one mito with the other two soloing the other two yellows. The spike team of 4 scrappers crushes their mito quickly, and moves to assist the next mito around; repeating the action to the third and so on. This method has maximized the 90 secs of RA boost to assure that mitos are being taken down in a front-loaded fashion. While the healer can get overwhelmed trying to keep scrappers going on the last few mitos, there is usually only a small window where we can lose a couple before all the mitos succumb to the stacked damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has become the standard. A few thoughts.

If you have someone with group fly, put them in the group of 4. That means that non-flying scrappers can stay next to the mito being taken down.

You've got four scrappers trying to defeat a mito, and two scrappers mostly there to hold aggro on their mito until the group gets to them. That means your highest damage scrappers should be in the big group. However, it's important that the two scrappers soloing a mito stay alive, and since yellow mitos blast through any defense or damage resistance powers, it's useful to have those two scrappers be regen. (If they fall, they can also use their self-rez power to get back up.)

I love the concept...but I can understand those who are a bit concerned about the privacy issues.

One thing I don't see in the list is "Hide me completely". If you've disabled everything, does your name and costume still show? Perhaps a simple solution would be a new setting, "Show me on web page", defaulting to No. The first thing I'd do would be to log into all my characters and change that to Yes...but the option should be there.

The ability to have a page for supergroups would be great. It wouldn't include people hidden in the roster (perhaps a count of hidden members) but it would be very nice to see.

I'm very excited about this opportunity, it sounds great.

Actually, I normally am there with Roncobot-Omega.

BTW, to those hating on Lallendos, I don't think you're being fair. I do understand the desire for a really new zone. I remember exploring Striga, and going wow. And "You mean there really is a secret base in the volcano????" Faultline is still pretty much the same zone for exploring, just levelled out a bit because of the flooding (and you do now get to go beyond the dam). The RWZ, other than the Vanguard base, is pretty much the same landscape.

I would love to play on a moon zone. Or, just the Paragon City MegaMall (all destructable, please) or the Paragon City Airport. As much as I'd also like to see what they'd do to Boomtown or Crey's Folly, a whole new zone would be whole new types of cool.

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for your insight, G D, old friend. I do differ on the RCS to RWZ thing, in that a new zone is a new zone. As I think on it now, I have run a NWN2 persistent world server, and world size does become a hardware scalability issue. It is possible that back end database programming and / or hardware limits made a new zone an unlikely prospect in a short timeframe.

I want to be wrong. For now I will end my discourse on the perceived downsides. I've said quite enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. We'll agree to disagree about new zones, but let me put one last word in (heh heh heh). The reason you want new zones is for new content. New stuff happening. CoH's hazard zones had no real content, and other than being sent in to do a hunt or an occasional door mission, might as well not exist. Seeing them rebuilt into places with content is good.

And while neither introduced new villain types...Faultline brought heros against the forces of Arachnos in a purely PVE basis, introducing you to the groups and their infighting. And given the importance of the Rikti in the backstory, they needed a chance to step up...and the RCS was the natural zone to place them.

So, if Boomtown becomes the center of a renewed battle between the 5th column and the Council, I'll be happy.

[ QUOTE ]
I keep seeing people laud the last year of development. I am not seeing it. Where are the new zones for the core user base of PVE people. Where is the new content for people like myself that actually LIKE the last 10 levels of the game?

[/ QUOTE ]

I9 gave us the Statesman's task force, a very challenging TF.

I10 gave us the RWZ. Yes, it's technically not a new zone, but it's all new content, including two rather difficult arcs in the 45-50 zone, and a new TF that's pretty good.

I11 flashback makes all the 40+ arcs infinitely repeatable. I've said for a long time that the "Hero's Hero" arc would make a great task force...and now you can do it as one.

I'm no fan of PVP...but I can't say that the focus has been excessively focused on there. Indeed, I'd say they have a legitimate complaint that PVP has been largely ignored. I don't mind it...but it is legitimate.

(I do think someone made a great point that in comic books, the main hero vs. villain interaction is "Villain tries to commit a crime, Hero tries to stop it" and PVP that was focused on that would be great, rather than just "let's just throw attacks on each other until someone's health hits zero".)

Base raiding is something else that can legitimately be described as largely ignored. Again, as someone not interested in base raiding (and isn't going to let my supergroup's hard-earned prestige be destroyed by some yahoos) it's not a big concern of mine, but I can't say it's been a big concern.

We did get new PVE raids in the new Hamidon Raids and the Rikti Mother Ship raids. I'm rather hoping they take another crack at the Hamidon encounter, it's far too dependent upon healing powers. Rikti Mother Ship raids can be fun, not something I do a lot of. But again, it's been only one feature in issues with other stuff.

As for the loot...I'm not much into loot, but I'm finding the IOs enjoyable. They aren't so unbalancing that you HAVE to get heavy into the loot (with the possible exception of PVP), I am as effective with my solely-SOed Messenger Dude as I am with my fully-IOed Roncobot-Omega. And it means that once I fit myself out with 35th level IOs...I no longer have to worry at level x*5-3 "damn, now I have to replace all my enhancements again".

I'll admit I'm a bit disappointed in the reliance on TF mode in I11, but so be it. I'd still say it's been among the best years so far in the PVE game, but your mileage may vary.

I'm cautiously optimistic. Yeah, lots of ways things could go south. But isn't that always the case? And there was one way I definitely saw things going south...Cryptic getting so tied up with MUO that CoH suffered, and that's not going to happen. Instead, as MUO gets closer, competition may pull the best out of the CoH team.

And if it proves to all go bad, well, things happen. But there's a lot of reason for things to go right.

Oh, and I'll take a cookie to feel better too. Cookies are always worth asking for.

[ QUOTE ]
Hell, doesn't the Mac OS ship with Bootcamp now? I don't see the incentive for a new version for Mac.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since my PC died, that's how I've been playing CoH, but I'm tired of rebooting for it. Transgaming has a thing called Cider that can wrap around Intel games to make them Mac games for fairly minimal effort.

Naw, I'm not expecting it, but thought I'd join in.