LiquidX

[ QUOTE ]
Question, do you enjoy spending money on something that has little or no use to you?

While I know influence and power slots and enhancement slots aren't money, they're comparable things- currency you work to earn and can be "spent" to your benefit.

So the parallel is similar- people don't want to spend their hard-earned currency on something that gives them marginal (or nonexistant) benefit, especially when there's alternatives that are far superior.

Also, we're heros- We want to feel powerful. Its part of the game's theme.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now, don't get me wrong. I fully agree with the fact that people shouldn't end up wasting influence on enhancements that will not affect their hero's powers thanks to caps. The Dev's SHOULD have some sort of way of indicating to the player that yes, adding another Flight Speed SO (for example) won't increase your flight speed anymore thanks to the cap.

What I don't understand, for lack of a better term, is peoples desire to Min/Max. To wring every last ounce of power out of their characters that they can. I'm not saying it's a wrong playstyle, and if thats what you enjoy, that fine. But I just don't understand HOW people find that fun.

I guess what it boils down to is that while everyone else seems to want to be the Supermans or Galactus's of the world, I'm content with being the Spider-Mans or Ambush Bugs of the world.

[ QUOTE ]
The BIGGEST benefit of posting numbers is that, when dev's introduce major changes, ...

a.) potentials for abuse can be more easily noticed.
b.) potentials for bugs can be easily identified.
c.) players can follow the logic of the dev's and, hopefully, flame less.
d.) players can feel more confidant in their power & slotting choices.
e.) If done right, game balance can be tracked by both dev & player.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I understand your argument, this is something I don't exactly agree with. Because you want to start to introduce the numbers into the mix, people start seeing their characters as less of a "character" and more of a jumble of statistics and figures. It becomes less about creating a character you enjoy and more about being worried about how your character performs without that extra .08 of damage.

In the end, to me at least, I think the more "numbers" and "statistics" you have available to you, the greater the risk of cheapening the game and the more destructive it becomes to the enjoyment of the game.

[ QUOTE ]
For instance , since issue 4 got live i have read that the Integration power has been modified . My Integration power on my scrapper is currently slotted with 5 healing single origin enh and 1 endurance reduction enh . I have no way to know if this configuration is optimal without having to get on this forum and ask "expert players" who do extensive testing to get a rough answer. In my opinion i think it isnt a convenient way to inform players about enhancements and slotting .

[/ QUOTE ]

Something I've always wondered...

Why do people feel the need that they *have* to be "Optimal" to have fun? Why does everything have to boil down to the numbers?

[ QUOTE ]
If the dev team is satisfied with an issue, could you let us know?

There is nothing more frustrating than testing an issue, discussing an issue, dealing w/ an issue, and posting on an issue without any response. If the "no response" is b/c the powers are working as intended, it doesn't seem like it would harm much for the devs to just pop up w/ that post, and explain why it's working as intended. At least that lets us know what the context of the power is, so we can better understand what's going on w/ our beloved heroes.

Thanks!

[/ QUOTE ]

Well...

Sometimes just because the Dev's are satisfied with the issue as it is doesen't mean that someone can't come along with a brilliant idea or something that no one else saw. So, if they say "Well, we are fine with this as it is now" runs the risk of cutting off the person with that idea.

(Not that this is actually the reason why they don't say so.)

[ QUOTE ]
You know how there's a EULA text you have to agree every time you start the game? Well, maybe this post by Cuppa should be required reading before every post on forums. (now, if there was only a way to make people actually read it)

[/ QUOTE ]

But how many people actually READ the EULA?

[ QUOTE ]
A ton have quit? Just how many is that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I believe according to the statistics the Weight of all the City of Heroes players averages out to 150 pounds... So 13.3 heroes. Or 14.9 heroes if your British.

[ QUOTE ]
What was the nerf? Taunt was changed so that Tank powers that cause Fear will not alow a mob to be taunted back in the Fear Power.

What Tank power causes fear?

Burn.

You can't keep mobs in Burn if you stack more than one patch. So you must let it die and start another no overlapping and you must run continual taunt or Burning Aura so ANY stay in.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's not a Stealth Nerf. It states it in the Patch Notes:

[ QUOTE ]
Fixed taunt powers so they will cause fleeing villains to return, unless they are affected by a Fear power.

[/ QUOTE ]

It makes sense anyways. How many villians are dumb enough to stand in flames that will hurt them?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My constructive post is...

Make all these power nerfs PVP only...

if they are so crucial to PVP let us who build a regen scrapper have it the way we did... that or let us choose a new powerset on respec... by nerfing someone who has a 28 toon like myself and even higher, you are hurting the community by making it so much of a nerf... I don't PVP so I am stuck with something that gimps me PVE and I am not entirely happy with that...

[/ QUOTE ]

Statesman has already stated that the powers were changed either because of PvE concerns, or PvP AND PvE concerns. Not just because of PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, we know. We just don't believe him. Doesn't fit the available facts. See if it was for PvE in any way, then there would have been some movement like there was in I2. Because you see, these changes do negatively impact Regens in large group play. Also, as Regens explained and as was proven, there are other sets that can do everything Regen does in PvE, but better. But there is one place where Regen simply could not be beat. PvP.

As we also explained, we fully knew that I3 Regen would be next to unstoppable in PvP. I for one couldn't come up with an attack chain that exists in the game that could consistently kill a Regen. So the change had to stay, no matter its PvE effect.

Statesman is no longer entitled to blind faith from me. I still think he's a swell guy, but he has a very Obi-Wan Kenobi "Many of the truths we cling to are greatly dependent upon our own point of view" view of the truth. So I filter everything he says for literal truth. On that score he hasn't lied, he's just misled people into thinking that PvE was a major justification for these changes.

All Statesman said is that he wouldn't change a set for PvP ONLY. He never said he wouldn't change a set for 99% PvP reasons and 1% PvE reasons. I think Regen was principally changed because of PvP, because that makes the most sense given the available facts. Sure they had some concern about PvE, but if that were even nearly as important, then there would be a lot more sets that got nerfs in I4.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, if they changes really *WERE* only for PvP, or even 90% PvP only reasons, then why didn't they make them PvP only? It's pretty darn obvious they can make changes to a power in PvP without effecting it in PvE play (Such as the fact that Brawl can knock out a toggle only in PvP play). It would have made a helluva lot more sense then just simply making a change they new would pi$$ off a portion of the playerbase.

[ QUOTE ]
My constructive post is...

Make all these power nerfs PVP only...

if they are so crucial to PVP let us who build a regen scrapper have it the way we did... that or let us choose a new powerset on respec... by nerfing someone who has a 28 toon like myself and even higher, you are hurting the community by making it so much of a nerf... I don't PVP so I am stuck with something that gimps me PVE and I am not entirely happy with that...

[/ QUOTE ]

Statesman has already stated that the powers were changed either because of PvE concerns, or PvP AND PvE concerns. Not just because of PvP.

[ QUOTE ]
If you care so much about this game, its players, and want to make it fun, then why nerf everyone? Why not just raise the other powers up? Is your balance paradigm of 1 hero = 3 +3 minions (after SOs) so important that you are willing to alienate and completely piss off so much of your player base?

I have a theory on why you would do that. It's simple. Nerfed powers = more time to level = more money for you.

Well if I log a crapload of hours into a game, grinding and struggling to get through it, I'm NOT gonna re-roll another character and go through that again. Last time I got sick of grinding I quit for about 4 months. I came back, basically because of perma-elude (I was a SR scrapper back before the first buff, right out of beta) and figured I could do more than grind by street sweeping even conned minions, and MAYBE three yellow ones. IF I got lucky.

So I come back, all excited that I could actually feel like a hero, and before I hit 38, BAM. Here comes the nerf bat. Really took the wind out of my sails.

If I get back to the point where I'm not having fun because I can't survive in teams made of players I've either convinced single handedly to buy the game, or helped convince, I'll quit again. This isn't a warning. I'm just saying. Making it harder won't make people play longer. It'll make them quit faster. I have a ton of games to catch up on, including the Neverwinter and Morrowind expansion packs that I still haven't gotten around to.

I love this game. I really do. I waited patiently for around 3 years for this game. Back when it was first announced, to the time I got the beta invite for being signed up on the CoH boards since freaking 2001/2002. And I'm readdicted. However, I'm not playing my main anymore. I've switched to a regen alt. My SR scrapper can't take part in AV fights or team anymore, so all I can do with him is solo to level 50. No task forces, no trials, just solo missions. When it feels like grinding again, I may just take off.

[/ QUOTE ]

And yet what about all the times that the Dev's HAVE boosted other players? Let's look at some examples from this update alone:

"Removed the base -30% Damage Resistance debuff from Kheldians and decreased their base HP by 12.5% (this gives them an effective net increase in HP). "

"Improved Max Stealth capability (High stealthy powers like Superior Invisibility can now better protect against foes with high Perception, like Snipers). "

"Increased Jack Frost's resistance to Cold. Jack Frost now has a permanent Chilling Embrace. Jack Frost Power now accepts Slow Enhancements. Jack Frost is now highly resistant to Slow effects (recharge and movement). "

"Decreased the Endurance cost of Jack Frost. "

"Increased Gravity Control/Propel damage. "

"Dark Miasma/Howling Twilight now restores Full Hit Points and Endurance to those you resurrect. This power no longer accepts Heal and Recovery Enhancements (it already restores the maximum HP and END, so there is nothing to Enhance). "

"Kinetics/Transfusion now debuffs the targeted foes’ Regeneration Rate. "

Not to mention things from past updates, such as revamping Martial Arts animations (As any MA scrapper who's played since Beta can tell you, the new animation for Storm Kick alone was a boon.) and a reduction to many a tankers Endurance usage.

In the end, sometimes Nerfs are a necessary evil. However, some posters seem to only want to focus on the nerfs and completly ignore the buffs and enhancements that have taken place over the year.

[ QUOTE ]
And in the end....

It's

Still

only

a

GAME!!!



[/ QUOTE ]

THERE...

ARE...

FOUR...

LIGHTS!!!!

[ QUOTE ]
Lazy argument. George Washington and the other founders used violence to protest his displeasure with England's tyranny. Revolutionaries throughout history have done the same. What does this have to do with a message board? Nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your right, and I should really know better then to be baited by Sagcat into trying to use his own half a$$ed comparison.

[ QUOTE ]
The developers are entitled to respect, but the level of respect must be earned. When the devs do and say things which are clearly illogical and contemptuous of our intelligence, then they deserve the grief that they get.

We either were lied to, or the devs were incompentent regarding the Regen changes. We were not listened to with regard to those changes. So many of us posted detailed findings with alternatives that led to the same result only in a more fair fashion. We were ignored.

They can post and say that they listen all they want to. I believe actions not pretty words.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, do you really think they would listen to someone who posts hatefilled and downright flameworthy posts in the first place (And before anyone says it, I am not saying you are one of those people)? Of course not. You don't have to agree with their decisions, and you don't have to like them. However, as the old saying goes:

"You will catch more flies with honey then with vinegar".

[ QUOTE ]

Basically he's say there's constuctive criticism and then there's [censored] and moaning.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Thanks _Pax_.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or, in case you need another example:

Your being asked to conduct yourself like Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks, not like Timothy McVeigh or Osama Bin Laden.

[/ QUOTE ]
I would never ask the devs to calmly accept being bombed. you've twisted my reasonable point into something preposterous. And no one should have to ever read anything in all caps. (see? I'm reasonable.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I wasn't trying to make it sound like you asked the Dev's to calmly accept being bombed. What I was trying to say, however, was that there are peacefull protests and revolutions (Like MLK or Rosa Parks did) and hatefull protests and revolutions (Like Timothy McVeigh or Osama Bin Laden).

[ QUOTE ]
Some people are more docile than others. On the other hand, some people grow up and become revolutionaries, protestors, and radicals. Those people were taught (rightly) to question authority. And those people will speak loudly and tersely when it's justified. And the docile ones will think the loud ones are being immature.

And the authority under question can respond to protest in a number of ways. How Cryptic responds to the community, even when the community is rioting, is up to them. But don't cause the riot and then act all offended that you got one.

[/ QUOTE ]

And yet there is a difference to protesting against a great injustice or starting a revolution against social intolerances, and sitting on a message board posting things like "OMG! YOU SUCK BECAUSE YOU NERFED SMOKE GRENADE! STATESMAN IS A LIAR AND A THIEF! CRYPTIC NERFED MY BABY! I'M QUITTING FOR WOW IF YOU DON'T ALLOW ME TO CHANGE MY EYECOLOR TO PEUCE!!!!!111"

People are not being asked not to voice their displeasure. Their being asked to voice their displeasure in a calm, rational manner.

Or, in case you need another example:

Your being asked to conduct yourself like Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks, not like Timothy McVeigh or Osama Bin Laden.

[ QUOTE ]
2. We dont know whats going through your heads and therefore dont really understand all the time what the logic the Devs find in nerfing something. Of course for Exhibit A I show you SS/SJ. Yes youve stated your reasons for the change...but from a players point of view, in some cases this makes no sense. Ive lived by the philosophy "if its not broken, dont fix it", not "if its not broken, break it and then eventually break everything else to even it out." I think that maybe the Devs should push a little harder to instate a change through the players point of view.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is, of course, always going to be a problem. The players mostly see how things effect *them*. The Dev's, however, have to take into account how things effect *everyone*. Thus this brings the two groups into conflict.

[ QUOTE ]
One thing I've learned with my three year old is to not get upset when he flies off the handle, especially when I do something that I know is going to cause frustration, misunderstanding and a feeling of injustice.

I had to develop some thicker skin. If he gets into some junk food he's not supposed to have, I take it away - guess what? He's going to feel robbed, no matter how justified I am in taking it away.

Same thing with adults. You take things from them, strip something away that they care about, but you fail to justify your decision, you're going to generate a response of anger and frustration.

I hope this doesn't offend your sensibilities, poor devs, but DUH. You make people fall in love with their characters - that attachment is a great acheivement of your's. You screw with those characters, and you're going to get a response. It might even be loud abd obnoxious like my three year old's.

So long as you "balance" a set and give 6 contradictory justifications for it, people are going to call you on it. If you ever had a good enough reason to "balance" regen, you never communicated it or provided us with a good reason we could hang our hats on.

So so sorry to have made you all cry or whatever, but you got the response you could expect when you took those actions.

Your choices: make *reasonable* decisions or get thicker skin.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's a flaw in your reasoning. 3 year olds don't post on the forums. Adults, however, do. And it's not an unfair request for people to *act* like adults instead of throwing temper tantrums like 3 year olds.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Super Speed used to give a good defense bonus. As it is fast enough out of the box, everyone was six-slotting it for defense instead of travel.

[/ QUOTE ]

Superspeed in live gives no defense bonus whatsoever. This is simply wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it *USED* to give a defense bonus. Before they changed it some time after Beta ended. (To the many cries of Superspeeders complaining it would forever ruin Super Speed)

[ QUOTE ]
I can't wait for the 2nd year anniversary, when I wake up in the morning and find that Statesman has slashed my tires and knocked up my girlfriend.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, that was the Dallas Cowboys. Statesman just TP'ed your house and left the flaming bag of dog doo on your porch.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You know, I really hate this argument. You see, sometimes what the people want is NOT whats best for the game or the community as a whole. A great example of this is SoE's new plan to open a dedicated auction site for their game. While it seems like a good idea on paper, since its "what the players want", theres a darn good chance that not only could it damage the game itself (Such as actually encouraging spawn camping, farming, and territorial confrontations) but what do you thinks going to happen if the IRS decides they want a piece of the action?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, let me rephrase... The devs' wants should be secondary to the FUN of the game. That FUN, is experienced by the players. Therefore, it is the players' FUN that is most important. Weakening in-game powers, abilities, and the overall play experience with constant nerfs in a crusade, where the devs have to answer to no one reflects very poorly on the development team. As a side note, meta-game additions, such as being able to buy levels, powers, enh's with real world money is a different issue alltogether.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, but fun is also subjective. For example, some people found it fun to teleport weakened or low level heroes into mobs of villians. So, naturally, it's a good thing that the dev's did not go with THEIR idea of "fun".

[ QUOTE ]
The way things have panned out show what people WANT, which is all that matters. Your and the devs wants should be secondary to your customers; you are here to provide US with an entertainment outlet - not see you world brought to life.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, I really hate this argument. You see, sometimes what the people want is NOT whats best for the game or the community as a whole. A great example of this is SoE's new plan to open a dedicated auction site for their game. While it seems like a good idea on paper, since its "what the players want", theres a darn good chance that not only could it damage the game itself (Such as actually encouraging spawn camping, farming, and territorial confrontations) but what do you thinks going to happen if the IRS decides they want a piece of the action?

[ QUOTE ]
I will be gone and not a threat, a promise the day this goes live.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, have fun wherever you go.

[ QUOTE ]
Well, yeah, again - all I am really concerned with is that our tactics are going to be severely limited yet again.

Mind you, I don't really have an issue with most of the changes... but the current test changes to SS and SJ... I see that States has said they have been evolving problems (at least with SJ) and that SS has been chagned in the past (removed the defense buff - yeah, I agree with that, it makes it nearly impossible to be hit) I also remember that SS was made non stackable with Granite Armor which really ... made me mad is the polite way, but I adapted.

Now, PvP - the jousting thing... yeah, that's kinda explotive. PvE? Hmmm... really hard to knock flyers out of the air as it is, now they're going to make it 50% harder? Hmmmm...

At any rate I'm probably exagerating, and for the most part I'm pretty happy with the way the Devs are going. These changes however? It really reduces legitimate super heroic type tactics and I just don't see how it is broken or explotive in the PvE environment.

-Esch

[/ QUOTE ]

*Nods* Right. The problem is, our view is limited to what we ourselves play. The blasters only see what is good or bad for them, scrappers only see what is good or bad for them, and so on. The Dev's, however, have to figure out what is best for the entire playerbase.

So, where for us the solution seems simple (Take the -ACC off of fly), for the Dev's it's not (If we take the -ACC off, how will it effect all the AT's compared to just adding a -ACC to SJ and SS?).

[ QUOTE ]
Liquid, I can understand your points... you're always pretty good at stating them... and I can see where just because no one complained doesn't mean there wasn't a problem, but look: Don't you find it the least bit interesting that now that they are trying to shoehorn PvP in, they are suddenly discovering all these powers that were "already broken"?

It just seems fishy to me... I'm not usually one who complains either, I've had my share of adapting to do, and have pretty much done so without complaint becuase I do believe that there should be some challenge to the game, but I am really getting worried that once someone discovers a new tactic that is perfectly valid, that power is going to be looked at and changed so that the tactic will no longer work.

This is an evolving game, there are, as you say, always new players coming in and new tactics (some of which are explotive perhaps) but are being discovered... I just... I don't know... I really didn't see a good PvE reason for doing this to SS or SJ.

Anyway...

[/ QUOTE ]

Does it seem strange? Of course it does. Does that mean thats the reason why it was done? Of course not. The problem is that people are trying to blame all the changes they don't like on PvP, and are (for the most part) claiming that Statesman is lying about why the changes were made without having any kind of proof. In other words, taking what can very well be just a coincidence and trying to use it as damning proof.

And in the end, it's not good for the community, and is rather unfair to Statesman and the other Dev's.

[ QUOTE ]
No, wait thats probably coming for the 2 year anniversary.

[/ QUOTE ]

3rd year, actually.