NewScrapper

Xtreme,

I'm working under the assumption that if you are teaming in an instanced mission (i.e., any mission, trial subtask, or TF subtask requiring you to either enter a building/cave/etc. or take the train to an exclusive outdoor map), there is absolutely no difference between how things will work in Issue 4 and how things already work in Issue 3.

(Hopefully, Statesman or some other knowledgable soul will jump in and tell me if I'm wrong.)

NewScrapper

I've noticed that nobody really seems to like the death-timer, even though under the present rules it only applies in zones, not in missions. The biggest concern, if I'm assessing things correctly, is that in fighting giant monsters like Babbage or Kronos, the possibility that a person could be shorted XP on account of an expired death-timer is significant enough to discourage fighting such monsters if and when they appear. After all, why fight Babbage during the Synapse TF if you don't have to and if there's a chance you might not get XP for it anyway? Why fight Lusca if you might not get the XP for it?

SUGGESTION 1 -- Implement the death-timer as planned with one additional rule: an expired death-timer doesn't affect XP gained from a team's fighting Giant Monsters.

SUGGESTION 2 -- Do not implement the death-timer at all in Issue 4; instead implement a "death exemp" solution with Issue 5 in which, from now on, the normal XP dead heroes would receive goes toward debt instead (and when a dead hero's debt is gone, the hero receives no XP or influence, period).

Thoughts?

NewScrapper

Pilcrow,

I like your suggestions, but I have some concerns.

[ QUOTE ]
1) Please consider adding a trivial amount of damage to all debuffs and controls.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't this cause a problem with aggro? Even if a player were to throw a smoke grenade and do 1 damage to each villain, he/she has still basically just aggroed the whole mob.

[ QUOTE ]
2) A better solution than the 1 minute death timer would be apprciated. I reiterate my suggestion that after a death you receive debt-relief XP only and that the XP be capped at 1/2 the "cost" of the death.

[/ QUOTE ]
Obviously, I agree with the "death exemp" proposal, though I don't really see a need for an XP cap. However, this is probably a major change to the code, so extending the death-timer to 5-minutes may be a good short-term solution, though it doesn't solve everything (see below). Maybe with Issue 5 we can see the "death exemp" option put into the game.

[ QUOTE ]
3) Pure buffers are still a bit shafted here.

[/ QUOTE ]
Only because of the death timer, correct? The "death exemp" solution would ultimately solve this problem, I think.

[ QUOTE ]
4) Strongly consider making all Rez's/awakens full (or half) rez's to help battle the death timer.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not sure how I feel about this. I think the disorientation effect would also have to be removed for this proposal to be implemented effectively. At that point you're pretty much drastically changing the function of the awaken insps -- might be necessary, but I would resist the urge to change awakens in favor of implementing the "death exemp" solution in Issue 5.

[ QUOTE ]
Consider also making more rez powers PBAE (like dark's) so healers don't have to choose which teammate gets XP as often.

[/ QUOTE ]
You bring up a good point in that teammate rez selection becomes more difficult for rezzers with the addition of the death timer. Again, the "death exemp" solution would be an answer to this.

NewScrapper

"We will be making it so that a Boss will NEVER show up on the mission for a solo player at the lowest Reputation level (Hard-Boiled, though we’re changing that to Hero). Instead, any named villain will be a Lieutenant."

Has this been put in place already? I've been doing solo missions a lot the last few days, and all the named Archons I've seen have been Lts, not Bosses.

NewScrapper

DR,

[ QUOTE ]
We need the bosses in the end missions of the arcs, otherwise the fiction is totally broken. They just don't need to be the uber-one-hit monsters they are now, unless you choose them to be with the slider of course.

[/ QUOTE ]

My thoughts exactly. I think that if you have your character's slider set to "hard boiled", then you should be fighting pre-Issue 3 bosses just like before (and not just lts).

Personally, I don't understand what prompted the boss changes in the first place. Bosses were challenging enough before they got powered-up, in my opinion.

NewScrapper

DR,

Okay, okay, point taken. Scrappers do have it easier soloing (which is how it's supposed to be). Keep in mind that I thought the boss rollback had already occurred. I have no objection to the boss rollback or, ultimately, to Statesman's mid-term "hard boiled = lts only" solution. My feeling was simply that if the boss rollback returned everybody to normal, then THAT could be "hard boiled" without any need for a "lts only" version of "hard boiled". Fair enough?

NewScrapper

Statesman,

I spent Saturday soloing in Striga Isle. Soloed 3 bosses -- 1 orange, 1 red, and 1 Elite red, and though I had to down some insps for them, I came through fine each time. So, in my opinion (and I'm assuming the rollback has already taken place), the bosses are fine for solo play just as they are. The only time it gets tough to solo them is if they are not alone -- that is, they are surrounded by minions and lts. Then you need friends, like in the Frostfire and Atta missions.

So, my opinion is that if you want to keep bosses as they are in hard-boiled mode and leave the "new boss style" for the ramped-up levels, that's fine by me.

NewScrapper

Bushpig,

The respec TF only has about 3 or four missions to it. That's not a huge time commitment -- 1-2 hours, perhaps? And considering it's something you can do only once every 10 levels, starting at level 24, it shouldn't be putting that huge of a dent in your play schedule. And I have a hard time believing that respec teams are so hard to come by -- I was invited to both respec teams I served on, and I wasn't even looking to do it at the time.

And, of course, you could always plan out your hero correctly the first time around.

NewScrapper

codeslinger,

I started out on CoH as a solo player. In other words, I wasn't interested in teaming, so I chose a scrapper for my character and did most of my missions on my own. Prior to issue 3, I had a pretty good record of soloing missions. No, I couldn't take on archvillains solo, but a red boss was doable, though a definite challenge.

Then Issue 3 came along, and things changed. Now, an orange boss can give me serious headaches, and Atta's freakin' GUARDS (lieutenants!) kill me over and over again.

Personally, as a player who prefers solo play, I don't want any boss, elite boss, or archvillain to get in the way of my story-driven play until the very last mission or two of a story arc. If I need help by then, fine and good, but up until then, I want solo play. Maybe you can throw in the occasional "two bombs at once" mission -- big waste of time, in my opinion -- but otherwise I want to be able to play alone.

Task forces? Trials? Different story altogether. Those arcs are geared toward multiple players and are entirely optional, so those are just fine by me. But when I'm doing MY missions, I want to be able to do them myself 90% of the time. Today, I'm never sure whether I'm going to come out of a mission alive, and that's not the kind of play I like.

So, I like the changes that Statesman has proposed. Knowing that I'll be facing lieutenants at max in my missions at least gives me a reasonable expectation of getting through them in one piece (or two pieces at most). Can't wait for these mods!

NewScrapper

One thing I've noticed, too. When it comes to story-driven play -- the kind that CoH is supposed to immerse you in the most -- the only real story-driven play I've seen occurs during solo play, because that's when you, as a character, interact one-on-one the most with your contacts and with the villains. When I'm able to solo mission after mission after mission, THAT is when I really feel like I'm immersed in a story. When I'm playing somebody else's missions or joining a task force of which I'm not the leader, it feels more like I'm just going through the motions because the team dynamic is more task-oriented than story-oriented. It's always, "Alright, go defeat 30 Clockwork, and I'll stay here and get the next task" rather than, "Positron needs a sample! Let's go!"

In short, players working together usually know that they are players playing a game, whereas a solo player can immerse himself in the story to the extent that he believes he's actually a part of the story. That's why I usually prefer to play solo, and that's why I think solo play has to remain a possibility at almost all times.

NewScrapper

I'm getting in late on this thread, so first, I just wanted to say a quick "thank you" to Statesmen for giving consideration to us solo players. With my first character I played City of Heroes mostly solo, teaming up only when necessary, and I found I enjoyed it quite a bit. Lately, since I started a new character and founded a Supergroup with him, I've teamed a lot more, and while I do enjoy teaming up now and then, I've come to miss exactly the thing Statesman mentioned -- being able to get on for an hour or so and solo a mission. The new boss changes left me feeling very unable to solo, so I'm grateful that the changes have been rolled back. So, thanks, Statesman!

Second, I like the mid-term changes. I prefer story-driven play, and it seems to me that the mid-term changes are perfect for those players who enjoy such play.

Third, I heartily give out a cheer for the long-term Mission UI upgrade. Recently, I was extremely angered when I chose a mission that gave no clue to its nature other than, "Hurry, hero!" and promptly logged off, figuring I could save it for later since there was no timer. Lo and behold, the next time I logged on I got a big "Mission failed!" banner across my screen. (What's worse, an NPC gave me crap about failing the mission, adding insult to injury.) So, I'm all in favor of any upgrade to the Mission UI that lets us players know exactly what we're getting into.

Finally, unless a lot of other players are screaming about it, I wouldn't worry about giving us players the ability to drop missions. With the new mission difficulty sliders, I would think that old missions can be powered up so as to be useful, XP-wise. But that's just my opinion; I don't know what the community at large thinks. I just think that the ability to drop missions is something that can be back-burnered if it conflicts with something else.

NewScrapper