Oblivion21

Recruit
  • Posts

    27
  • Joined

  1. Oblivion21

    A smile for you!

    I was on a BAF run once when a kinetic got confused and speedboosted a group of prisoners. They were so fast! I laughed and laughed.
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kitsune9tails View Post
    The basic problem I see is that the Devs have given us a WEALTH of content, but the players choose to grind that which is most easily repeated.

    I think the devs want us to do a variety of content to avoid burnout, but how to do that? They would have to give a 'first time you did this mission today' bonus or something that would be brokenly huge.
    It's not just most easily repeated, it's clearly better benefits.

    One of the issues the devs have is they've introduced too many forms of in-game currency. I'm trying to take the dev-sanctioned way of obtaining a single PvP IO. No one runs Keyes, so I run a BAF and LAM every night for 30 days... for one IO. It'd probably be smarter to buy oranges and make money to buy the IO, but I am still taking a dev-sactioned path because it is quicker than any other dev-sanctioned path (half the time of alignment merits). Even still, I think the cost is a bit extreme and I find myself viscerally disliking the grind and the game. One obvious solution is to eliminate the different forms of currency and normalize the costs. Let me run any content for as much reward as the trials. Let me play an hour or two every night and still find myself with enough reward to buy a PvP IO. Instead, they've greatly diminished my enjoyment of the game by altering my playstyle such that I'm playing sub-optimally if I do anything else. I was only able to log in tonight for long enough to look around and I couldn't force myself to accept any trial invites. I don't think this is a good path.
  3. I don't know how imposing a cap on inf or the market would help anything. The OPs suggestion of increasing drops and decreasing inf generation would bring prices down, but it might not leave you in a better position as now the market is flooded with new drops and the price decreases, so your new drops are now worth less inf.

    The people currently farming for inf are getting drops along the way and putting them on the market. So they are not only earning inf, they are increasing supply of recipes and salvage at the same time. All in all, as we reach equilibrium, what we are seeing are the true costs for some rare items. A kinetic combat might only drop once per 120M influence earned through play. Capping the price at the market won't work (as we've seen through the ultra rare PvP IOs that are bought and sold outside the market) and capping inf won't work because people will just hoard them.

    What I would really complain about is simply the absolute rarity of some of these recipes. The +def PvP IO is dropping so rarely that it is simply worth 2.5B. If you cause deflation, it will cost less but you'll be earning less inf along the way.

    As for myself, I'm trying to take the hard path and earn the 60 emp merits to buy a single PvP IO. Running a BAF and a LAM every night for a month would earn me that one IO out of a entire set (which would take half a year playing the same two trials every night). I started this journey after I had already played enough trials to T3 this character and tonight I stand at 28 emp merits. Tonight, when I logged in, I realized that I simply can't take it anymore. I've grown sick of the trials and sick of CoH. I do think that some of the costs for these items is simply extreme, but the devs feel that running the same content content 30 days is a fair price for a single item. I think it's a bit extreme and has left me ignoring the other content. I'm not totally blameless here, there are other ways to earn the merits, but playing the market and farming emp merits or not my cup of tea or not as efficient. There's not a whole lot of difference between farming trials or farming the same tip missions for 60 days. Think about it, running the same type of missions every night for an entire year is required for one set of some IOs.

    Given the prices set forth by the devs in this context makes it quite clear that complaining about your inf purchasing power isn't going to do much. The only way to increase your relative purchasing power is to increase the drop rates, especially for rare and extremely rare items. I think the prices put on these items in terms of emp or alignment merits make it quite clear that they want these items to be exceedingly rare or expensive. This has sent some players, like myself, into behaviors that make me form a disdain for the game. I don't want to do another freaking trial in my entire life.
  4. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Soopa View Post
    There is a post on the brute boards that shows numerical evidence that brutes outdamage scrappers, even if they have SD. He posts a number of attack chains and shows the totals, top 5 all being brutes. So, if they outdamage and out last scrappers, it goes to show that, for now, brutes are a stronger choice.
    I had a longer post but the forum ate it . I believe the thread you are referring to was started in 2009 before the changes to fury.
  5. Quote:
    Originally Posted by BeornAgain View Post
    I was on a Lambda a while back where I saw a SS/Elec Brute solo the Warehouse. Now, they didn't get all the crates before the other team was done, but as I recall they did get 5 of them.

    I was blown away, and if I had the presence of mind, Id've asked them for some build advice...

    Anyway, my 60 month vet came and went, and I put the extra slot in Freedom and rolled up an Elec/Elec Brute for a tech/cyborg concept character. He just hit 44 this morning (bouncing from Burke to Tarikoss to Mortimer to Silver Mantis to the Midnighter arc to Scirocco's patronage then doing my tips to get rogue).

    This is what I have come up with so far. The Kinetic Combat, Reactive Armor, Oblits and Gaussian's (along with the Numina and Miracle procs) make this a not cheap toon, but no purples or PvP IOs still puts him at 1 purple insp from the soft-cap on S/L.

    Anything else I can do?

    http://www.cohplanner.com/mids/downl...89FF039544E861

    Villain Plan by Mids' Villain Designer 1.942
    http://www.cohplanner.com/
    Click this DataLink to open the build!
    Level 50 Technology Brute
    Primary Power Set: Electrical Melee
    Secondary Power Set: Electric Armor
    Power Pool: Leaping
    Power Pool: Speed
    Power Pool: Fighting
    Power Pool: Leadership
    Ancillary Pool: Mu Mastery
    Villain Profile:
    Level 1: Charged Brawl -- KntkC'bat-Acc/Dmg:35(A), KntkC'bat-Dmg/EndRdx:35(7), KntkC'bat-Dmg/Rchg:35(15), KntkC'bat-Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg:35(23)
    Level 1: Charged Armor -- TtmC'tng-ResDam:50(A), TtmC'tng-ResDam/EndRdx:50(11), TtmC'tng-ResDam/Rchg:50(15)
    Level 2: Lightning Field -- Oblit-Dmg:50(A), Oblit-Acc/Rchg:50(11), Oblit-Dmg/Rchg:50(19), Oblit-Acc/Dmg/Rchg:50(27), Oblit-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg:50(46), Oblit-%Dam:50(48)
    Level 4: Conductive Shield -- RctvArm-ResDam:40(A), RctvArm-ResDam/EndRdx:40(13), RctvArm-ResDam/Rchg:40(21), RctvArm-ResDam/EndRdx/Rchg:40(48)
    Level 6: Combat Jumping -- LkGmblr-Rchg+:50(A), LkGmblr-Def:50(7), LkGmblr-Def/EndRdx:50(50)
    Level 8: Hasten -- RechRdx-I:50(A), RechRdx-I:50(9), RechRdx-I:50(9)
    Level 10: Boxing -- Empty(A)
    Level 12: Maneuvers -- LkGmblr-Rchg+:50(A), LkGmblr-Def:50(13), LkGmblr-Def/EndRdx:50(50)
    Level 14: Super Jump -- Winter-ResSlow:50(A)
    Level 16: Tough -- Aegis-ResDam:50(A), Aegis-ResDam/EndRdx:50(17), Aegis-ResDam/Rchg:50(17)
    Level 18: Thunder Strike -- Sciroc-Acc/Dmg:50(A), Sciroc-Dmg/EndRdx:50(19), Sciroc-Dmg/Rchg:50(23), Sciroc-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx:50(27), Sciroc-Dam%:50(37), FrcFbk-Rechg%:50(43)
    Level 20: Weave -- LkGmblr-Rchg+:50(A), LkGmblr-Def:50(21), LkGmblr-Def/EndRdx:50(50)
    Level 22: Static Shield -- ImpArm-ResPsi:40(A)
    Level 24: Chain Induction -- T'Death-Acc/Dmg:40(A), T'Death-Dmg/EndRdx:40(25), T'Death-Dmg/Rchg:40(25), T'Death-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx:40(31), T'Death-Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg:40(36), T'Death-Dam%:40(43)
    Level 26: Grounded -- Aegis-Psi/Status:50(A)
    Level 28: Energize -- Dct'dW-Heal/EndRdx:50(A), Dct'dW-Heal:50(29), Dct'dW-Heal/Rchg:50(29), Dct'dW-Heal/EndRdx/Rchg:50(33), Dct'dW-Rchg:50(40)
    Level 30: Taunt -- Mocking-Taunt:50(A), Mocking-Taunt/Rchg:50(31), Mocking-Taunt/Rchg/Rng:50(31), Mocking-Acc/Rchg:50(34), Mocking-Taunt/Rng:50(37), Mocking-Rchg:50(37)
    Level 32: Lightning Rod -- Oblit-Dmg:50(A), Oblit-Acc/Rchg:50(33), Oblit-Dmg/Rchg:50(33), Oblit-Acc/Dmg/Rchg:50(34), Oblit-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg:50(34), Oblit-%Dam:50(48)
    Level 35: Power Sink -- EnManip-EndMod:20(A), EnManip-EndMod/Rchg:20(36), EnManip-Stun%:20(36)
    Level 38: Build Up -- GSFC-ToHit:50(A), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg:50(39), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg/EndRdx:50(39), GSFC-Rchg/EndRdx:50(39), GSFC-ToHit/EndRdx:50(40), GSFC-Build%:50(40)
    Level 41: Electrifying Fences -- Enf'dOp-Acc/Rchg:50(A), Enf'dOp-EndRdx/Immob:50(42), Enf'dOp-Acc/EndRdx:50(42), Enf'dOp-Immob/Rng:50(42), Enf'dOp-Acc/Immob/Rchg:50(43), Enf'dOp-Acc/Immob:50(46)
    Level 44: Ball Lightning -- Posi-Acc/Dmg:50(A), Posi-Dmg/EndRdx:50(45), Posi-Dmg/Rchg:50(45), Posi-Dmg/Rng:50(45), Posi-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx:50(46)
    Level 47: Lightning Reflexes -- Run-I:50(A)
    Level 49: Power Surge -- S'fstPrt-ResDam/Def+:30(A)
    Level 50: Spiritual Core Paragon
    ------------
    Level 1: Brawl -- Empty(A)
    Level 1: Fury
    Level 1: Sprint -- Empty(A)
    Level 2: Rest -- Empty(A)
    Level 4: Ninja Run
    Level 2: Swift -- Run-I:50(A)
    Level 2: Health -- Numna-Regen/Rcvry+:50(A), Mrcl-Rcvry+:40(3), RgnTis-Regen+:30(5)
    Level 2: Hurdle -- Jump-I:50(A)
    Level 2: Stamina -- P'Shift-End%:50(A), P'Shift-EndMod:50(3), P'Shift-EndMod/Acc:50(5)

    Thanks in advance, and I really want to make him an end-game player. Also, on a completely cosmetic note, how do I tint his electrical armor and attacks to look like the Mu fences and ball lightning? I want the appearance to remain constant throughout, and since we cannot tint patron or ancillary powers (yet), I want to make everything look uniform.

    Thank you again!
    Do you happen to remember the name of this brute (mine is Tesla Array)? I was on a Lam awhile back on my SS/elec brute and ended up soloing a lot of it. FWIW, my build is very similar to what you have here, at least as far as elec goes. I have the knockback protection in power surge and +def in grounded (I hate knockback). At 145% recharge plus t4 spiritual, you basically have perma hasten. There's maybe a 1 second gap. I might, as suggested, get that slot to your armors for reactive armor sets. I'm also not sure about Gaussians. I might take three slots there and get kinetic combats in boxing (I build for the softcap without a purple). Also, as already suggested, I'd slot power sink with something else. I have efficacy adapter in mine.
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by InfamousBrad View Post
    So you can earn your IO in 20 game sessions if you play each trial once per evening. Or you can earn it in 60 game sessions if you only play the BAF.

    I think you just made my point, not yours.
    It's quite obvious from the statement you quoted that I don't just run the BAF. After running Lam and BAF, I've pretty much consumed my free time for the evening. Obviously, Keyes gets left out.

    Also, look at the context of the post I was responding to. Running BAF 2 or 3 times a night or all 3 once a night for several weeks at a time is a grind no matter what. My response was addressing the grinding of the incarnate content, no matter the trial(s).
  7. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Winterminal View Post
    Ditto.

    I hear your strife. I can't stand grinding, the ends do not justify the means, in my opinion. But a population of people who want their power and want it nao (a.k.a. many players) will take the fastest path of least resistance, and right now, that is the BAF trial. Personally, I think Lemur Lad summed it up quite nicely:
    When I play, I'm usually grinding the iTrials. It's not because I'm stupid or "want it nao," it's because I want the gear at all. I'm not a roleplayer. I spend a significant amount of time "playing" mids, adjusting an alpha here or an IO there. I try to tweak the numbers to make my superhero as super as possible. This also means trying to obtain the best loot.

    And really, I'm doing this on a budget. I don't have a single complete purple set. I own not a single PvP IO. I still crave these things, however, and the iTrials are the only realistic way for me to get there.

    Think about it. I just tweaked my SS/elec brute and made him supremely awesome with one caveat. I need the PvP +def. I really want to see this character come to life (that's how I derive my enjoyment from this game), and the trials are my only realistic way of achieving this. This particular IO costs ~2.5 bil, 30 hero merits, or 60 emp merits. For someone who doesn't spend too much time playing the market, 60 emp merits looks pretty enticing. I can earn a hero merit once every two days or 2 emp merits a day. I play maybe 3-4 times a week, so it's pretty easy to see why I might grind the trials. It would take me 15ish weeks of alignment grinding or 8ish weeks to get the emp merits.

    Like it or not, the devs are turning this game into a gear-driven game. With IOs, shards, threads, and salvage, I'm always looking for the next item to make my character just a little bit more uber. I know others like socializing, others like roleplaying, and others like the story lines. I don't expect everyone to understand the enjoyment I get from having 1.5% more def or 5% more recharge, but I don't think it's fair to call me stupid.

    And honestly, I don't particularly like the grind. I just don't like playing the other content thinking that my alt is somehow "incomplete." I really wish they'd bring the cost down somewhat or at least make anything as enticing as grinding the iTrials for gear. As it stands, however, for someone who does only play a couple of times a week, it feels almost like I'm wasting my time doing anything else if I'm aiming for better gear. The devs have made the deliberate choice to make it this way, so if anyone can be blamed, it is them.

    As a side note, I really don't care for the new emphasis on league raids. Prior to incarnates, it seemed that the devs did their best to cater to those who prefer to go solo (excepting Hamidon). I never felt gimped playing on my own or with a regular team of random players. With a random assortment of seven other people, we could steamroll almost anything so teamwork, while it existed, was never really crucial. Now, especially with 30 second auto-damage, it seems that teamwork is required. This is why my favorite trial is BAF. It's not so much that I love BAF, it's that it's the hardest to screw up. We've taken people who've traditionally played as super heroes and made them be part of super leagues. Frankly, a lot of them aren't doing very well. I'm sure this would be different if I was around enough to be part of a dedicated SG, but I'm not. I have to run my trials with random people. I can't believe how many people don't read their league chat or don't know how to check for temp powers. Screwing up some on BAF is usually survivable, but having no grenades on LAM can really be a deal breaker. Don't even get me started on Keyes (which is why I never run it). I just don't know if it's a good idea on the devs' part to require people to be in a big league for a griefable trial. It can make things very frustrating.
  8. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Silas View Post
    People don't like being told their pet AT isn't very good, Obitus
    I don't even think Obitus or myself are saying blasters aren't very good... they still bring tons of damage. It's just that the damage they bring doesn't really outshine other ATs, which sucks because damage is supposed to be THE thing that differentiates blasters from every other AT. If I was forming a team and needed damage, yes, I'd take a blaster. But I also wouldn't bat an eye replacing that blaster with a scrapper, brute, dom, VEAT, HEAT, or some powerset combinations of corrs, controllers, or defenders. And that's if I was looking specifically for damage, which I never really do. Most of the time I'd rather add more buff/debuff to the team as generally that really helps get the steamroll going (if we're talking all lvl 50s).
  9. Quote:
    Originally Posted by SinergyX_NA View Post
    Is there any scrapper setup that would be that terrible, that a random blaster setup would do considerable more? I've played quite some scrappers and blasters, where blasters have a huge range in survivability and damage output throughout the sets, yet scrapper seem to be very consistant on damage output (as in, high, higher, highest).

    Sets like energy/ice, Arch/elec (wich also rely heavy on melee dmg) or rad/dev (yeah stupid set i know), they feel very 'weak' compared to the big boys as Sonic, fire and elec. Where scrapper, i cant really find a real weak set, only dark perhaps on AoE strength.
    I think scrappers can only be classified as ST vs AoE. The devs have done a pretty good job managing those two. And really, even DM has access to nice AoEs in the epics and now a crashless nuke on 90s timer. So a DM is ok in AoE (especially when paired with secondaries that have some attacks as well) but a God in ST who's best attack chain includes a self-heal. I've seen DM/Shields do stupidly powerful things against hard targets.

    I think the issue with blasters (and tankers) is that these are basically still teaming builds that have had their wings clipped. These ATs really are designed to complement each other. The tanker can stand in close while the blasters blast without fear of reprisal. Without the caps we have now, blasters really were easily the king of damage and the tanks the king of... well, tanking. I think the nerf bat really hit these ATs. Scrappers could still solo, but tanks and blasters were now a lot closer to scrappers in terms of survivability and damage. And because devs believe that everyone should be able to solo, you saw damage buffs for controllers bringing them closer to blasters. IOs certainly eroded the need for a tank as nearly everyone was running around with softcapped defense. They also increased the dmg by way of direct buffs and recharge buffs. With the right build, people can reach their absolute best attack chain, maintaining their highest possible DPS. I think after these developments, we're realizing that the absolute best DPS of a blaster is just not much higher, if at all, than scrappers, dominators, corruptors, and controllers. Granted, three of those ATs can have lousy damage builds, but all of those three bring something to the entire team, not just themselves. The devs threw tankers a bone with the new content somewhat reducing the effectiveness of def builds, but I'm not sure if it's possible to do that with blasters. Even if i21 has enemies that are just bags of HPs, it would probably still be better to have the SS/FA brute or DM/Shield scrapper or the Fire/Dark Corruptor or....
  10. Quote:
    Originally Posted by StratoNexus View Post
    It would be interesting to see how many blasters truly do better damage than scrappers. It is not self-evident as you seem to think.

    And that doesn't even take into consideration the extra time most blasters will need to take in order to survive (things like juking or mezzing).
    This. People are seemingly taking it as self-evident that blasters do more dmg than any other AT, not just scrappers. I'm not convinced this is the case. When I started playing CoH, I rolled blasters precisely because this is how they were described. And my second blaster was actually a very high-damaging combo (fire/nrg). This is the first combo of any AT I got past 40, and honestly, while it's dmg is great, I don't think it really outshines my fire/kin, ill/rad, or even my new elec/wp. Is there a difference? Perhaps, but I'd hardly say the difference is significant enough to bestow the "cannon" moniker upon blasters, and my scrapper is just middle-of-the-road in regards to scrapper dmg (certainly not a fire, shield, or even electric or dark). I can still walk that scrapper into a 54 x8 ambush farm and complete it in about 20 minutes, 5 or so more if I don't swallow reds. And at no time am I in danger of death. There are lots of other scrapper builds that would put me to shame.

    And sure, blasters can be made tougher and can unleash on teams, but so can any other AT who are also being buffed with dmg, either directly (FS) or by extension (-res). On a team of 8 50s (or a league of 16 or 24), I've never found damage lacking. If anything, the awesome power of buffs have made purely dmg-oriented ATs obsolete, but at least scrappers still have the ability to solo just about any content in the game.

    I think when people say that blasters give up too much for not really being the cannon that people who love blasters are insulted. There's no need to be. It's a valid point that's not an attack on your skill in fighting or design. It's simply recognizing that, say, a fire/fire blaster doesn't really do much more dmg than an elec/shield scrapper, and the scrapper gets def, def debuff resistance, dmg resistance, mez protection, +health, a temp God mode power, and the ability to slightly buff the team.
  11. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Igor_The_Mad View Post
    As people get their t3 lore and destiny slots filled for the extra two level shifts the trials become easier and easier. Case in point would be friday morning, when I decided I was going to finish my t4's come hell or high water. Found a league forming in the virtue global chat channels full of people I'd never met or heard of, and we ran the BAF trial over, and over, and over. The first few runs were not exactly smooth, but we got it done - had a few escapes during the prisoner phase but the rest was not too hard. After about 10 runs though, the league really just gelled and we started destroying it; 20 minutes per run was the average. No prisoners made it past their starting doors, we got the Master of BAF meta badge quite easily, I made 6 new global friends, got 5 t4's crafted (made an extra lore set for teaming), and ended up running the trial 28 times in about 11 hours.

    I spent way too long on the computer that day, but none of us wanted to quit because we knew we'd never find another league that was as laid back and successful as this one. Again, not a premade per say, just a bunch of people who didn't know each other at all but were capable of thinking for themselves and figuring out the best way to run the trial without having one person "lead" aka screaming at the league threatening to kick them if they didn't do exactly what he said.

    Many times in the last 6 or 7 hours we queued up with 22 people and zoned in picking up a couple people from the LFG queue who immediately said "I've never completed this successfully - it's so hard." They wanted to be assigned to an AV, or wanted me to assign a team to kill adds only - and 22 people told them to relax, kill things, and don't sequester the raid. That's about all there is to it. All these raids who put team 1 on x av, team 2 on y av, and team 3 on adds are silly. Just group them up, kill the AV's at the same time, and anytime adds are nearby, tab over and use judgement. With 24 people randomly popping aoe destiny buffs, it's rare during the last fight that I wasn't either resist capped, regen capped (12.5 percent per second, hadn't ever seen that before o.O) or had defense values below 150 percent so adds weren't really a threat to anyone. Threads are gained pretty quickly when you get 6 per trial. The devs did a great job with this content and I'm looking forwards to the next installment.
    Successful trials ARE still heavily dependent on players (at least on Freedom). Not so much their builds, but their ability to play the game and follow the lead of others. I still hate doing PUG lambdas because we always end up missing 2-3 acids and grenades. We'll sit by the gate and tell people, CHECK YOUR TEMP POWERS. Nothing. Of course, only about 10 of the 15-16 people will actually respond to anything said at all. Which means we have to spend a few minutes killing the containments and caches. And inevitably, we still end up missing grenades and acids. I have interface unlocked, and once Destiny is unlocked I will not do another lambda. In my experience, people tend to do better with BAF as it really is just about killing things in the right place. Asking people to look at their temp powers is a bit much it seems.

    And, at least on Freedom, not assigning teams to locations would be suicide in a PUG. I've only been in two failed BAFs. The first was like the one you were describing. The reinforcements quickly destroyed us. The second was a master attempt. That was laughable.

    Are the other servers better? I'm getting the feeling that a lot of the 50s on Freedom are either being played by "gold farmers" or never played the 1-49 game before.
  12. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison View Post
    We already win out on defense and resistance modifiers, and now even our hit point cap is higher, so I'm happy with those values.

    My most commonly put forth suggestion is to allow tanker toggles to not suppress while mezzed. That would give tankers a unique survival advantage over the other ATs.
    I still don't think this addresses any real issues. I'm looking for a way to give tanks purpose 100% of the time and not the 1% of the time when a tank actually gets mezzed. You're looking for ways to increase tank survivability when tank survivability is not a problem. I honestly won't care if you allow tanks to keep their toggles up while mezzed because the amount of time I spend mezzed is so miniscule that it's nearly completely irrelevant.

    And your first statement leads me to believe you're missing my point. I'm not saying that tanks aren't the most survivable AT, I'm saying that tank survivability is going to waste and I can't see you adjusting it higher much further without just making tanks invincible.

    IOs especially have given other ATs the tools to build incredibly survivable builds. Not more survivable than tanks, but survivable enough that they don't often have to worry about death and they are still able to do what their ATs were meant to do. I don't think tanks will go away, but I often ask myself the point of playing my wp/fire tank when my elec/wp scrapper can survive 99% of the situations the tank could and output nearly twice the damage doing so. I've never argued that my scrapper is as tough as the tank, I'm arguing that it doesn't matter. The survivability is close enough that any rational person who was looking at the numbers and the mobs, and whose goal was to kill the mobs as quickly and efficiently as possible, would choose the scrapper.

    I play tanks because I love the concept of being a "tank." Taking damage that no one else can take and standing strong. I imagine that's what I am when I play. Objectively looking at the situation, outside the rare outlier, my scrapper can fulfill that role just as well with the ancillary benefit of giving me the feeling of being a mean SOB who can dish it as well as he takes it.
  13. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison View Post
    Which is why my suggested changes are usually ways to make tankers better at aggro control and even more survivable. Since tankers are supposed to have superior survivability, let them stand out by a wider margin.

    This alone is not enough. You need to make that survivability worth something. As it stands, even if they were made more survivable, it wouldn't matter because nothing threatens our characters enough.
    I don't know how you're really going to do that, the survivability part that is. What more can be done to drastically increase the survivability of tanks relative to other classes? If we are talking IOs then you really remove defense, as we're already at the cap, from the equation. Increase hit points? Increase resistance? My WP tank is already at 70% resistance to s/l at all times, and that's just Willpower. Should my WP be able to reach 90% without an external buff or SoW? 99%?

    I guess my point is is that there's not so much wiggle room on the mitigation side of the equation without making a good IO'd out tank completely invincible. That is, unless you throw in some Godly content that just wipes the floor with any other AT, but that makes a tank necessary again when the idea is held that no class should be necessary. It also doesn't solve the fact that for 99% of the content in this game, tanks don't need more survivability, they need a better and faster way of eliminating the mobs.

    I think JB is right, the current game mechanics are broken.

    In a game like this where damage is better at mitigation than mitigation is at damage (and killing speed means something in terms of experience, reward, and endurance), once my toon is survivable enough, I should always preferentially choose more damage over more mitigation.

    The most interesting game mechanic I can imagine right now, and one that might go a long way in balancing mitigation and damage, is to actually reduce mob resistance based on their blue bar. Thus, the longer the tank stands and is attacked, the more damage he/she does to the mob. This rewards high levels of mitigation with increased killing rates. The flip side to this is for scrappers. Reduce their mitigation but introduce a mechanic that says the less hp a mob has the less damage it does. Thus, you reward high killing speeds with increased mitigation. You'll have different playstyles (one would favor front loaded, the other back loaded damage) but would likely result in similar overall speed. It also makes sense thematically. If you hit and hurt a person, their attacks have less punch and do less damage. If the person attacks too often, they grow tired and are less able to defend themselves against your own attacks. I'm sure there are huge holes in this plan that would have to be addressed and I seriously doubt anything like this would happen at this point in CoH's lifecycle. And yes, front loaded damage is almost always advantageous, but the scrappers also have to bear the brunt of the alpha with less mitigation than they currently enjoy, thus increasing their risk in-kind.

    And yes, the mechanic I described above is basically fury, but applied to the mobs and not the AT. I think the devs were probably thinking something similar when they created brutes, which are tanks "done right" in my opinion.

    As it stands, I just think that too many ATs reach good enough survivability to take on pretty much any content in the game which makes the sacrifice in damage that tanks make a little unfair in my opinion. I think unless you change the actual game mechanics so that mitigation actually means as much as damage, the only real way to bring the melee ATs in line is to actually homogenize their mitigation/damage capabilities. You saw this with the change to fury as brute damage levels will be more consistently in line with scrappers, so I'm just waiting for the inevitable change to tankers (assuming one is coming, which is almost necessary imo). Fury is a game changing mechanic, bruising is not, so I don't think bruising is the last word.
  14. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nalrok_AthZim View Post
    Tanker. Tanker! Tanker!

    Tank! Er! One who tanks! Of course survivability is the selling point! Do you think I rolled up my Stone/NRG or my Invul/Ice to do jaw-dropping damage? Of course not, I rolled them so at 41+ I could walk up to AV's and drop kick them in the junk knowing full well they couldn't kill me without some major exertion.
    Eh, many other ATs can do this as well. You should go look in the scrapper forums to see the crazy stuff some of them have done. And unlike tankers, many scrapper builds can kill the AV themselves pretty quickly. A dark/sd even solo'd LR (although it took a bit of luck).

    I love my tank as much as the next guy, but he's simply not needed for current content. The game was designed around SOs and many IO'd out scrappers and brutes are reaching and exceeding tank survivability with SOs. So while the tank may exceed brutes and scrappers in sheer survivability it doesn't really matter as almost nothing in this game requires it. And the few things in this game that require it are usually beyond an IO'd tank's ability and thus the tank still requires support in the form of buff/debuff, mitigation which can also be applied to scrappers and brutes making them "good enough."

    I think another problem is simply the nature of def in this game and the way IOs are skewed to those attributes. It's much easier for a scrapper or brute to build for increased def than it is for tanks to build for increased damage. Even squishy ATs can become insanely survivable now turning themselves into tankmages. I've got a fire/dark corr build that is softcapped to ranged attacks. Why do I need a tank? I'm debuffing the enemy like crazy, laying down massive amounts of damage, and I rarely get hit. And when I do, I have one of the best heals in the game. When all ATs can reach this level with some investment, where is there a place for an AT who's sole purpose is to survive and take strikes while sacrificing damage? I can make a scrapper or brute or corruptor insanely survivable as well and not sacrifice any damage.

    I'm not saying that people won't play tanks, clearly they will. And I'm not ridiculing the AT, I love my tank. It is still cheaper and easier to give a tank ridiculous amounts of mitigation than any other AT. I'm just saying this love for tanks does not preclude me from objectively looking at the AT and examining it against other ATs in world where there are a plethora of options to increase survivability but few options to increase damage. It's far easier for other ATs to overcome their weaknesses than it is for a tank to overcome there's. I don't think a relatively small change like bruising is really going to make much of a difference. I do think the devs made a mistake by making +def so available when the softcap is 45%. It's too late to change that now and I seriously doubt the devs with make +dmg as common as +def so I really don't know what change would bring the AT in line.
  15. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Panzerwaffen View Post
    I think you seriously exaggerate the issue for new players. Your perception seems to be that lower population servers are full of cliques that shun new players and ignore them. My experience has been completely different. I see new players often on Protector. They don't seem to have any major problems finding out about global channels, joining TF's, forming teams, or whatever other problems you seem to think they have.

    New players aren't shunned. They aren't ignored. They are welcomed. The Mentor Project, which has spread to all servers now, originally started on Protector as part of the New Player Council.

    The so-called 'empty' zones are often exaggeration as well. While they might not be populated like the busy servers, every time I log on I see people in the normal popular hub locations: Atlas, Talos, Ouro, etc.
    Larger population servers also form communities, there are just more of them. It's not so much that players are shunned on low population servers as much as it is about the fact that players will be more likely to find PuGs, communities, and mentors they enjoy and have something in common with.


    Quote:
    OK. It's a bad idea. It will only exacerbate the situation and drive more people to the crowded servers and away from the others. It will make lag worse on Freedom and Virtue and cause more lock-outs and longer queues during events and 2xp. Even more to the point, I'll suggest that the devs do not want to drive players to the busiest servers either. Look at how they intentionally arranged the server load screen so it displays lower load servers first.
    I think this was ok when the overall population was larger, but I do not think this is a good idea now. When new players could choose even the least populated server and find zones full of other players this is a good idea. When players choose the least populated server and find the place nearly empty, this is a bad idea.

    And I don't know why exacerbating the situation is a bad idea. If we believe that new players coming to the game would preferentially choose the most crowded server, do you really think it is a good idea to make their first choice the least crowded server, especially given the discrepancies in population. It's not like Freedom and Virtue have 40% or 50% more players, they have 300% or 400% more players. That is a drastically different experience, and given the shift that occurred during free server transfers and our presumption that new players would select the highly populated servers, apparently an experience that people prefer. If people join Freedom or Virtue and find the lag unbearable, the server selection screen would also tell them what servers have a low population. I'm just helping to give them the tools to make these decisions.

    Quote:
    Here's a counter-suggestion: Do what some other MMO's do. Lock out the most crowded servers to new players. Only existing players can make new characters there. All others are forced to go to other servers. That would balance out the population, alleviate the load issues on the busiest servers and increase population on other servers, which would, according to some here, be a good thing.
    You could also run into the opposite problem in that there aren't enough new players coming to the game to have a drastic effect on individual server populations (there are 11, after all) and thus you cause them individually to come to the conclusion that no one is playing. Ironically enough, I could really only see this having a real effect if we limited the servers newcomers could join to one or two or reduced the sheer number of server options available.

    And I've never suggested we force new players to do anything or onto a specific server. I've merely suggested we give them information that allows them to choose a server that best fits their playstyle. If that means more new people join Freedom and Virtue, so be it, it will be their choice.
  16. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Forbin_Project View Post
    I believe it's less difficult. Whenever someone asks about which server has the most population on the forums, they get several helpful responses about the population, server personalities, and where they can go on the forums to meet people from whichever server they eventually decide on. You can't get that kind of fantastic response from the server selection page.
    That's not a measure of difficulty, that's a measure of utility.

    Quote:
    Ah completely dismissing anything anyone on a low pop server might say, and insulting the ones that speak up. Yeah that'll win people over to your point of view.
    I'm not dismissing anything. I'm separating data by quality, and I will always choose quantitative or qualitative. You have your anecdotal evidence, and I have mine. I can quite easily find people in the server subforums complaining about population. On the front pages...

    http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=232047

    http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=228628

    http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=229054 you'll have to go down to post 11 on that one...

    point being this was about a 2 minute search. You see how disputable qualitative data is?

    Quote:
    You are the one getting defensive, so if anyone feels threatened it's you.
    I'd say I've remained rather objective. For the life of me, I can't see a reasonable argument as to why the devs *shouldn't* give players more information on the server selection page regarding server population.

    Quote:
    While I'm flattered that you seem to think that people on Virtue hold me in such high regard that they wait with baited breath for my opinion of any given new player, I fear I must burst your bubble. I'd say 99% of the population (plus or minus 1%) never knows I'm online let alone who I am.
    I just found it amusing that you would tell people to stay away from Freedom because they were jerks while simultaneously displaying said behavior... albeit in a different way.

    Quote:
    No one has said that the population hasn't declined. That is the nature of all online games. Memberships fall and rise constantly for various reasons. You used the term declining which implies a constant loss. I used the term healthy which acknowledges that the population may currently be lower but I believe it's just the normal rise and fall for a 6 year old game that has paid off all it's outstanding debts and is still generating a decent profit.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
    Ah. There's the difference. You believe the population is declining and I believe the population is healthy.
    ??? Maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

    Quote:
    I only know what you've posted, and you yourself said that the reason you find yourself standing at a place like the trainer for any length of time is when you are deciding what powers/build to choose.
    Which I can't think is that unusual which is why I'm not sure it's a good reason to /gignore someone. You have even started that you have been wrong more than once.

    Quote:
    I'm sorry but I find it hard to believe that it took you hours to choose 3 powers and assign 8 slots. Now I can believe it may have subjectively felt like hours, but that's different.
    It is not unusual for me to spend hours on the forum, especially after IOs hit. Sometimes I read debates about powersets, builds, or even ones like these.

    Quote:
    I find it funny that you accuse me of rushing to judgment while you are eager to do the same about the methods I use to make my decisions and that it happens with some regular frequency.
    I didn't rush to judgment, and it was you that admitted that you've been wrong on more than one occasion. It's even more disturbing that you recommend people stay away from Freedom because they are jerks. It's a little hypocritical.

    Quote:
    You also seem to be determined to overlook that when you check Info and notes you pull up things like bios, badges, global names. All of which can be used to determine if an account is an RMTer. It must be, in your own words, because you are emotionally involved and can't use logical reasoning.
    But you can't definitively determine, can you? You already admitted as such. By the way, I don't think I've ever given any of my alts a bio and there's nothing extraordinary about my global name. Although I have them now, there was a time when, just like you, I had no veteran badges (and there's not a whole lot pf badges to get running sewers in AP).

    Quote:
    RMTer's use free trials to gather info and send spam. They won't write bio's unless it's an advertisement for their website. They won't have account level badges like Destined One, V.I.P., or the Pocket D VIP Gold Club Member Accolade. Their globals are usually gibberish, sometimes something chinese, or some creative spelling variation of their website like Ga(you know who) dot com.
    Did those people you ignored and later reversed share these same attributes?

    Quote:
    Again you are assuming that I have far more influence on other players than is in fact true. Whether or not I ignore someone has little effect on their game play.
    However, a player who just purchased an MMORPG who ends up on a server with little MM might be disappointed. So while you and your community (or the community you are apparently defending) find these servers enjoyable because you all know each other and how to find each other, a new player may not. All I'm suggesting is that they are aware that certain servers have more population than others.


    Quote:
    I see this must be explained to you again so I'll type it very slowly. The only people that get shunned by an entire community are the people that act like rude, obnoxious, jacktards.
    But it doesn't help that someone like yourself, involved in the community, shuns someone because they stood in the same place for too long.

    Quote:
    The question wasn't valid. First, you used the term "several" Several means more than two or three but not many. It would take far more than a handfull of people ignoring someone to detrimentally affect their ability to find teams even on a low pop server.
    It was a perfectly valid question. On a low population server with an admittedly tightly knit community, it means that, as far as you're concerned, they are not available for one of the few teams actually running. It also means that you are unavailable to them if they ever decide to actually be proactive and start their own. If you don't know the global channels, /sea can be very frustrating on low population servers. It's sometimes even frustrating on Freedom.

    Quote:
    Second, you assumed my server was a low pop server.
    Although this may not be the case, it has little bearing on the debate.

    Quote:
    Okay, I'm imagining this new player is being ignored by myself and several other longtimers on Virtue. It would still be fairly easy for them to find a team on my server even if they were being ignored. And since the only other server with a higher population is Freedom I do believe that they are far more likely to have an unpleasant experience on Freedom than they would on Virtue.
    Do you think this would be the case on Champion or Protector? I'm trying to ensure new players know which servers have high populations so if they are looking for a more massive experience, they know to at least start with Freedom or Virtue.

    I don't really care how you feel about Freedom as this isn't a debate about which server is "better," it's about getting information to newcomers so they can make an informed decision and have a pleasant experience. I don't think we do ourselves any favors when they join a server where it'll be difficult to actually play with other players in their new MMORPG. As long as we can get population information to players, you can go into the Freedom subforum and make a sticky telling everyone what jerks we are for all I care. I'm just trying to get new players paying subscriptions so I can continue to keep playing.

    We are still wasting time here, and have gotten a little off-topic. If we want to stay on topic then we can debate the merits of my suggestion... The server selection page should contain player population information so players can make a better informed decision.
  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Forbin_Project View Post
    I disagree. It is far more likely that the people that want to be social will seek out the forums as one of the tools to meet other players.
    Do you think that is more or less difficult than getting the information directly on the server selection page?

    Quote:
    No it isn't. It's speculative at best. We don't have access to the proper information.
    Less speculative than concluding that there is no problem because people from the low population servers claim there isn't.

    Quote:
    You don't get to tell other people how they feel.
    Perhaps, but I think that if you feel threatened by the discussion then you are too emotionally involved in the process to make a logical determination. Ultimately, CoH does not live or die by your emotional or social attachment to your server and fellow players, they have to keep the lights on.

    Quote:
    Who said you did?
    Given your strong opposition to my suggestion, I can only conclude that this is your implicit assumption. Do you really feel threatened merely by my suggestion that players see how many people are actually on a given server at the server selection screen?

    Quote:
    They get treated the same as everyone else. I shun everyone without prejudice. I simply use Notes to justify it, or to explain why they are the rare shining exceptions.
    And other players are supposed to feel confident that this behavior will make newcomers feel more welcome on your server if they just happened to choose it? Heaven forbid a new player accidentally chooses Freedom and has to endure rude tells instead of your server where they might be outright shunned.

    Quote:
    Ah. There's the difference. You believe the population is declining and I believe the population is healthy.
    Given the Q1 financial report, I feel it is safe to conclude that overall populations have declined.

    Quote:
    No, you didn't.
    Well, I guess you know more about my history with CoH than I do then.

    Quote:
    And with that statement you prove that you don't stand silently in one spot for 2 hours not doing anything. You had to move in order to level up. You can't get access to new powers unless you go around and earn experience. While you may choose to disagree, there is a huge difference between seeing a character in the same spot for two hours and is still level 1 and seeing a character in the same spot who was level 1 and then is level 3 then later still is level 5.
    How does this prove anything? Many times I would run a sewer run and go from 2 to 5 or 6 or 7 and then stand in AP for a few hours at the same level while appearing AFK. Is that really so hard to believe? I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm merely pointing out that your rush to judgment might be seriously detrimental to new players when you don't know all the facts.

    Quote:
    As I just explained above you have never been in any danger of being labeled in a certain way because you actually level your characters. RMTers that are standing around gathering names don't.
    So you only /gignore level one players?

    Quote:
    This is another topic where we disagree. I believe tightly knit communities are friendlier and more willing to show new people the ropes. Only people being rude and acting like jerks have to be concerned with offending everyone.
    Or, heaven forbid, they stand in the same place for too long lest they suffer the long arm of your shunning.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
    They get treated the same as everyone else. I shun everyone without prejudice. I simply use Notes to justify it, or to explain why they are the rare shining exceptions.
    It sounds like you are extremely helpful and friendly.

    Quote:
    Fairly easy.
    Yes, I'm sure it'd be very easy for someone who doesn't know anyone to find many teams after the small community has shunned them. Certainly, quite a bit easier than it would be on Freedom or Virtue, right?

    Quote:
    Ah. You are assuming my preferred server is low pop. I play mainly on Virtue, but I have characters on every server.
    Does this somehow preclude you from answering the question?

    I'll repeat...

    Quote:
    Do you think they are better or worse off if they had joined a server with more people who are new like them or who aren't as tightly woven into the same small community?
    Quote:
    In my experience in those situations people are more likely to form an "us vs them" mentality. And if one of the pairing is accepted into a larger group and doesn't bring the other along, the one remaining can grow bitter and more antisocial.

    My old gaming group used to see this happen all the time at the local game store between the groups of teens. There were the ones the were pure computer gamers, there were the CCG players, the role-players, The DDR players, and the War Hammer players.

    Our gang, consisting mostly of military vets, went out of our way to keep the outcasts interested in gaming by inviting them into our games. The size of our group ebbed and flowed with the shifting tide of teen popularity but the kids new there was always an open spot where they were welcome.
    And yet, you've been far more open discussing your predilection to shun people than to go out of your way to find and help newcomers. Yet, I'm supposed to accept that people are better off going to your server than Freedom because people on Freedom are the jerks. At the very least, I'd like to think that newcomers could find friendly or mean people on all the servers, but on high population servers there'd just be more of them and thus a greater opportunity for the newcomer to find a community.
  18. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Forbin_Project View Post
    In my opinion that's what the forums are for. The problem is that a lot of people want to jump in and start playing as soon as possible rather than take the time to read the manual, do the tutorial, etc.

    And I know that some people will try to argue that new players don't know about the forums, but I feel that's being insulting to them. Very few are MMO virgins, most are vets of other games, and even the ones that are completely new are probably more game savvy than I am after 6 years of playing MMO's.
    I think this sets the barrier too high. To know what server actually has enough players to sustain active teaming you should check the forums. We're not trying to make the experience difficult for new players, we're trying to make it as easy as possible. It would be much easier for the player to see on the sign in screen which servers have people than it would be to ask them to scour the forums. I think at this point we all have a duty to try and get new players engaged. You can't really prevent attrition so the future of this game basically rests on getting as many new players as possible. It wouldn't take much coding at all to change the server selection screen, especially if they already have code to get the numbers.

    Quote:
    It's always going to be a problem. However I think the bigger problem is that new players aren't used to how heavily instanced this game is. They expect it to be like most other MMO's where everyone has to stand around a spawn point and wait their turn to whack a target.
    This doesn't change the fact that a new player will have much more opportunity to both see and play with other players on a busier server.

    Quote:
    But your side of the discussion is claiming those servers are empty. If they were truly empty where are all those people that defend their particular servers coming from? One would think that if the servers were truly empty the number of people complaining would outnumber the defenders, yet in 6 years that has never been the case.
    This is just anecdotal evidence. Can you provide me the number of people that have come to the defense of the low population servers as opposed to the number of people that have complained. This argument is purely the impression you've had colored with your like or dislike of certain servers. The only quantitative data we have is from Bill Z and it's quite telling.

    Quote:
    Not trying to bash Billz numbers but they don't show anything of the sort. All they show is what he found using search the last time he was on Pinnacle at that specific moment. You can't draw any remotely accurate conclusions from a single use of the search feature.
    He drew data from all the servers (I believe on page 15 of this thread). They clearly show disparity between the servers. Regardless, this is much better data than "people come to the defense of the low population servers." Frankly, there's no need to use words like slander or defense here but these servers aren't under attack. There's just the numbers and what objective decision can be made to improve the quality of life for those players that already play and those we want to play. I haven't suggested servers be merged, I've merely suggested that new players be made aware of population differences.


    Quote:
    You're darn right I did, but you are forgetting that I don't make that decision on the spur of the moment. I also said that I take the time to use the star/notes feature so I can keep track of them and if I see I made the occasional mistake I can correct it and take them off ignore.
    Which is great, but you've already put that player at an early disadvantage in my opinion. You've labeled them a certain way and now the onus is on the new player to reverse the shunning they have received from you. I do not believe that is healthy for a game with a declining population.

    Quote:
    Easier. New players do not camp silently at zone entrance spawn points, next to trainers, etc for hours at a time.
    I did. When I was a newer player, and still today, if I'm building a character with alien powersets, I will often have the forum open in another window going through builds and deciding what power to take next. And if we accept your presumption that even new players will surf the forum, I don't find it hard to believe they might be doing so in-game. It would've been unfortunate had I done this on your server as you would've labeled me a certain way and I would've had to prove to you that I'm just here to play the game.

    I understand that you like the small community of people that you've formed, but these tightly knit communities, I believe, are a barrier in getting newcomers immersed in the game, at least initially. Imagine if that new player was ignored by you and several other long timers on your server. How easy would it be for that new player to find teams and find a group of people they can play with consistently? Do you think they are better or worse off if they had joined a server with more people who are new like them or who aren't as tightly woven into the same small community? Although not a great analogy, I would liken it to switching high schools. It's better that you're with another new student on the first day than have to try to find a place among people who already have long established relationships. We're trying to make entry as easy as possible here.
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Forbin_Project View Post
    The devs can't force people to play a faction that they don't want to. They tried to entice PvE players into PvP zones by placing badges, missions, and valuable rewards in those zones and it failed miserably. Most players refuse to set foot in those zones.
    No, but they can let players know which and encourage them to go to servers that have large populations where they will be more likely to find teams and find people who are willing to show them the ropes. It's not about forcing players to play red side, it's about at least notifying new players which server has a red side that will actually be massively multiplayer.

    Quote:
    Upgrading the servers does not stop people from being lazy and only clicking on the top server.
    Nor did I suggest it would. I was merely stating that this is likely not the problem now that it once was due to server upgrades and a general decline in population.

    Quote:
    And yet each time someone makes a claim like that, players come out of the woodwork from the server being slandered and refute the claim that no one is on those servers.
    A somewhat ironic statement given your first refutation to my next quote.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
    You can claim that you haven't experienced any rude behavior. It may be true but it's more likely that you are just saying that because you think it will help your side of the discussion. The sheer number of posts to the contrary over the years have shown that that server has earned it's notorious reputation.
    Do you think it is possible that people coming out of the woodwork to claim large populations on their server are just saying it because it will help their side of the discussion? We only have Bill Z's number to go on here, and they definitely show that some servers have rather low populations, especially red side, even during peak hours.


    Quote:
    You can claim that you haven't experienced any rude behavior. It may be true but it's more likely that you are just saying that because you think it will help your side of the discussion. The sheer number of posts to the contrary over the years have shown that that server has earned it's notorious reputation.
    I would think that Freedom would have more complaints simply given the larger number of people that play there. This does not saying anything about relative proportion, however.

    Quote:
    Also the jerks tend to gravitate to the heavily populated servers just because they can blend in with the crowds easier. When they are on the low pop servers they tend to stand out and get /ignored and shunned by the smaller tight knit communities. The notes feature is a great tool in blacklisting the obnoxious players.
    Was it you that earlier stated that you put people on /gignore if they are standing in Atlas looking suspicious? Do you think that kind of behavior makes it easier or harder for new people to gain entry into the smaller tightly knit communities?
  20. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Forbin_Project View Post
    And with this you just answered why red side has has a significantly lower population. Most people buy City of Heroes to create and play with Heroes.
    And those that wanted to be villains will be just out of luck if they want to experience MMO.

    Quote:
    In the beginning the servers were listed by population and they were forced to change it because people being lazy always selected the first server on the list and. This led to certain servers getting overpopulated and having stability issues.
    After recent hardware upgrades and a general decline in population, I can't see this as being much of a problem now.

    Quote:
    Reversing the list funneled new players towards the less populated servers where they didn't have stability issues and the new players encountered fewer jerks which seem to gravitate to a certain server that shall remain nameless.
    And now, instead of encountering jerks, they just encounter almost no one at all. I didn't experience any rude behavior when I first joined Freedom, if that's the server to which you are referring.
  21. The first character I ever created was an nrg/fire blaster (terrible combination) on Liberty. I picked up the game many years ago after seeing some advertisement or review (can't remember which now). Being a newb, I selected Liberty not because of any informed decision but because I liked the name. I only got the blaster to level 17 before I quit.

    You see, I had some limited experience in MMOs before CoH and I had some expectations about what massively multiplayer meant. And although I have better knowledge now about how to find teams and other players, at the time my expertise was limited to broadcasting messages attempting to get invites. It didn't take long for me to become frustrated. However, before quitting the game entirely I noticed that when logging in, Freedom had the magical yellow bubble next to its name. That one little detail saved my sub and has kept me around over the years. I appreciate the large number of people online, even the occasionally annoying spammer. It adds color and entertainment to the atmosphere. In my opinion, that's what massively multiplayer means.

    I also understand that this isn't what everyone is looking for in CoH. There are people out there that like their low population servers because they've made a home and community there. It's just not very friendly for people who, just like when I started, don't know how to become a part of the community and enjoy playing this game in the presence of others. There's a reason that many people are curious as to the number of people playing this game and how active the servers are. We do the whole community a disservice when these people become frustrated and leave. I would therefore make two recommendations:

    1) Some notification on the sign in screen regarding server population. Honestly, I wasn't even aware until this thread that the servers are listed according to population. There is basically no guidance for a beginner as to which server has a large population.

    2) An auto-teaming system to make it easier to get on a team even if you aren't aware of global channels or your server's super groups.

    Looking at Bill Z's numbers is kind of disheartening. Depending on the time of day, I have trouble getting large teams on red side on Freedom. I can't imagine trying to do this when, at its peak, the server only has ~70 people on red side. If we ignore the people who are hiding (as they are probably not going to be actively teaming) and we assume that a good chunk of that 70 are 50s who are farming, socializing, playing the market, etc (maybe 30%, unless someone here has some concrete data), that leaves 49 people stretching from level 1-49. I could see how someone just starting at level 1 with no friends and no group would definitely feel like the place was barren, especially if they logged in during non-peak hours. Now, I'm not trying to be unfair to people who are hiding or who want to solo, but I have to imagine that most people who purchase this game do so to play with other superheroes. I can't see how having so few teaming opportunities for new players on some servers is sustainable or desirable. Maybe more needs to be done to funnel a player's first character to a high population server so they can get a bigger bite of the MMO experience before they go to a smaller server with a tighter community.

    I would probably pursue every possible option before merging servers, but I don't think consolidation is something that can be entirely ruled out as the game ages and populations shrink.
  22. [ QUOTE ]
    Here's my take on "pure" meatshield tanking: it requires your teammates to work with you.

    If your team isn't going to stand back and let you set up the mobs -- and few teams need to, so you'll seldom find people inclined to do this and seldom find players mentally agile enough to adjust to it -- you'll need to be mobile and damage-dealing to keep as much aggro as you can in a fluid team environment.

    There's no question Granite is the ultimate anvil, but I find my Granite Tanker wanting teams to slow down and let me take some time to get aggro set. It's very hard to be as flexible and fast-moving with Granite (or Stone as a whole, if you consider Rooted) as it is with other sets.

    I generally agree with what Call Me Awesome wrote above. Willpower is a fabulous Tanker set, but it's less attractive for meatshield/aggro duty. I personally would extend the recommended secondaries beyond his choice of Stone Melee to include Super Strength, Battle Axe, or War Mace, because of controls in those secondaries. It's too easy to get fixated on setting up combos (and lose track of teammates or aggro in the process) for me to recommend Dual Blades for a meatshield build; Fire has no controls per se, and I have little experience with Ice or Energy Melee, both of which are often cited for low damage (at least pre-35 for EM) to boot.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I have a WP/Fire that's nearly IO'd out and he's a complete beast. I have one taunt in RttC and I have taunt from fire. I jump into a spawn and hit combustion, which has a large radius, then hit fire circle sword after they've gathered on me. Doing that plus taunting anyone on the outskirts keeps the team chugging.

    And this sucker is crazy tough against most mob types. Without a huge investment, he's softcapped to s/l and over 40% to the rest, except psi. If the enemy is in melee, he's softcapped to all except psi, which is still > 30%. He's got 70% resist to s/l, but weaker resists to the rest. Add this to 3100 hit points and 600% regen (much higher surrounded by enemies) and this tank is a force. My only issue are spawns with large number of -def attacks, but many builds have this issue.
  23. [ QUOTE ]
    [ QUOTE ]
    [ QUOTE ]
    G_tanker you said you saw a lot of WP tankers face plant on the 54 boss farm. Why do you think they face planted and how can you build a tanker to avoid that? Does WP suck at Tanking?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Let me answer for G_tanker.
    I'm going to guess the WP Tanks he saw faceplant either did not have Tough and Weave or just were not good at Tanking.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I can speak for myself, thanks, I have lots to say about terrible tanks.

    First off, willpower is a middle of the road set. It does not really excel at anything - jack of all trades syndrome. It can be built for pretty much anything, however. Innately, as a set, it does not have a great starting point against 54 smash/lethal bosses.

    Many of the terrible tanks I've seen this week did have tough and weave. Some were too stupid to run them, I kid you not (too much endurance? lol). Incidentally, one non-WP highlight of this week was the stone tanker that didn't enhance granite and was going down where my invuln scrapper had no problems. That cracked me up.

    Typically they weren't played/built. 54 smash/lethal bosses are not WP's forte innately the way it is for invuln or stone - they do more damage per hit than lower bosses, meaning more needs to be regenerated, and the -tohit effect is much weaker vs them. Higher resistance is important if you want to stand up to that much damage consistently, and you definitely want to softcap S/L or melee for that environment if you can manage it. (Of course, one FF defender or Fort and you're pretty good!)

    By comparison, my invuln scrapper was tanked 53's from 28-39 and 54's since then in the last few days. I simply IO'd out for defense to S/L and built teams or brought purple insps to finish the softcap when needed, always with at least 60% S/L resistance.


    Another thing is keep in mind your taunt aura is weak. Annoyingly weak. I have played with a number of bad willpower tanks in the last few days (my ABSOLUTE favorite one was the 48 WP/Fire/Pyre yesterday that thought she was 'helping' whenever I brought a new pack of 54's into the group by fireball/taunting them off me and losing the ones she had next to her - we had like a dozen squishy deaths in a run due to her not knowing when NOT to taunt) so I'm a bit jaded.

    Willpower's big strength is not innately S/L, but it can be designed for it with a little effort and can do quite well. As always, there's an insp vendor right outside the AE - it always pays to have an emergency skittle to cover your holes. Bad players will think they can tank simply because their AT says "Tanker" (*laugh*), and most of them get too caught up in the glory of standing in a pile of mobs to realize the nuances of capping and agro, then wonder why their teammates are dying. Please, please don't be one of these players. I can't do double and triple spawn herds of 54's with partners that try to steal my agro and lose theirs in the process - it kills teammates.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Nearly finished with my WP/fire tank. I'm missing a few sets to give me +HP and the Task Force Commander Accolade. I have ~2900 HP, but will have ~3100 when done.

    Through sets and power choices, I've softcapped S/L defense (over 40% on the other types as well) and have 70% resistance to S/L. In a huge group, I'll get >150 HP/s regen. WP with the right slotting can be an unstoppable machine. Not only because of survivability but because of longevity. My recovery is 4.21 end/sec. There's basically zero downtime. If I hit SoW, I cap my S/L resist easily and up my recovery even further.

    My only regret is selecting fire. The AoEs are nice, but being a tank they are simply for holding aggro. They also provide no mitigation. I've just started a WP/SS and am building him in a very similar manner, and plan to perma-Rage. The end crash is not an issue so I plan to get a great deal more mitigation and damage on top of the incredible survivability I have now.

    I was also fortunte to buy many of my IOs when the AE was in full swing. I got the KC recipes pretty cheaply and even rolled a LoTG:Recharge and NC: Regen/Recovery. It was (is) relatively cheap to make an extremely effective WP tank even though the price of KCs has increased substantially.
  24. [ QUOTE ]
    Personal thought on question.

    Slower levels = Greater Value of the Goal

    Faster Levels = Firecracker goal. Ooo, ahh at first then nothing.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I don't believe that's true. I slaved out to make the first 50, but I didn't feel any particular sense of accomplishment when it was done. It also didn't unlock some huge chest of new content.

    Like I said, the only new content for me in this game are basically the characters I create. If you don't want me going 1-50 quickly, ok, but at least give me an opportunity to quickly go to a point where I really start feeling powerful. This is a subjective request, but for me it would be late 20s to the early 30s. Definitely something past stamina.

    It also helps me pick out duds. The game changes quite a bit when you get into the 30s and 40s. I discovered this with my second alt ever, a fire/nrg blaster. I was extremely powerful when I got into the late 20s, but as I hit the late 30s I realized I strongly disliked this alt. I spent much of my late 30s mezzed. He's still sitting in his late 30s. It's not really time wasted, as I enjoyed him up to that point, but it was certainly disappointing to realize that he wasn't going to get into the content in the 40s. It wasn't until I stuck with my scrapper that I hit 50, years after I started.

    I've already unsubscribed once due to boredom. You might say longer leveling provides more value, but I say the longer leveling isn't worth the prize at the end. I'd rather play around with many different powersets than spending time getting one to 50.