The_Foo

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps the issue between the MMOG and comic viewpoints here is less divisive than it seems. Does anyone disagree that fighting a couple of +4 bosses solo is wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]
On a regular basis? No. But on occasion, where their abilities are something I'm very strong against? Yeah, I'm ok with that. The Human Torch doesn't have much to fear from Pyro's fiery birds after all.

I think we need a new category of enemy though, to illustrate Comic villainy between the Boss and the Archvillain, at roughly the two +4 boss level. Call them the Villain, the unique costumed enemy that doesn't make the city tremble at their approach, but is still someone you run from when you see them rob the bank down the street. They're your Electro's, your Sandmans, your Mirror Masters and your Boomerangs. Guys without minions, without support, who strap on a costume and try to rob a bank anyways.

We're missing those kind of guys, the ones who aren't organizational geniuses or the ones lacking in personality but have some power. Paragon would be a more interesting place with them here too.

[/ QUOTE ]
Now that I agree with.

There needs to be a few (dare I say it?) EQ-style mobs that are group-on-one challenges, but not something so rare and unique as your Adamastors, Babbages and such, and, obviously, no where near the ability of the archvillains.

The problem with this game is that it's designed to mimic the superhero world. This can't be done massively multiplayer. I mean, really, we've got 95 Human Torches, 189^3 Punishers, at least a gajillion Wolverines... How the heck do you replicate a world were being a superhero or supervillain is rare when you've got 100 000 subscribers?

I guess I'm saying that some concessions must be made for this to work. Part of that is accepting that you're not Batman or Superman or the Hulk, and your supergroup isn't going to be the X-men or Fantastic Four.

So we fight jacked up super-thugs who are produced by 'dyne, genetic research or supernatural tampering. Who's to say that Batman wouldn't have trouble fighting a legion of Fifth Column ubermenschen?

Personally, it all boils down to having fun, which for me is pretty much calculated thus:

<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>FUN = Challenge*XP+Influence
-----------------------
Time</pre><hr />

Maybe that's why I'm not seeing this as doom-and-gloom. My fun calculation doesn't take # of enemies beaten into account.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't consider being reduced to struggling in a fight with three street thugs as a veteran superhero "lucky" want to decrease XP for minions? fine. buff them a bit? fine. cripple me by making it impossible for me to play.... definitely not lucky. Are they going to clip spawn size? in the high game you barely EVER see spawns that small. Check out PI... huge spaws usally accomanied by a boss or SEVERAL luis. with that kind of equation you'd HAVE to have teams of 3 or 4 to do anything in the post 39 game.

It's a bad damned idea.

[/ QUOTE ]
There's a whole boatload of assumptions you're making there. If you're going to assume that everything you have is going to occur, then, yes, that's not lucky. It also doesn't sound very fun to me.

I think you need to scale back on the hyperbole and take a look at what I said.

Now tell me: would you be unhappy if soloing three white-con minions was challenging, fun and profitable?

Those were my assumptions. We can't even debate if we're not going to be looking at the same situation.

Also, yes, I consider us lucky. This dev team is the most open, honest and downright human I've ever seen. Look at the changes Geko made to the super strength powers when Issue 2 went on Test. They changed things in ONE DAY. ONE DAY!

I've never seen a dev team that was willing to act on that kind of timetable.

Quality vs. quantity.

Some people want to have tougher fights with three whites.
Some people want to have tougher fights with twelve whites.

What's the difference? Why can't "minions" at level 30 be considered a challenge in groups of three? If they're appropriately scaled up with powers and, most importantly, XP, then it's really just a matter of preference.

Frankly, I couldn't care less about numbers as long as I'm having fun and levelling at a decent rate. Whether this is fighting an archvillain or even-con minions doesn't matter.

Perhaps the issue between the MMOG and comic viewpoints here is less divisive than it seems. Does anyone disagree that fighting a couple of +4 bosses solo is wrong?

Minions should be thwompable in droves once you get up there, but the lieutenants and bosses shouldn't. That's my issue.

That said, Statesman's commentary at least proves that they are aware of the issue, understand some of the root causes, and can see why people aren't happy.

Every MMOG should be so lucky.

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I know, Thorn, your current FOTM build is a Tanker, and you don't like that they don't do certain things as well, so you've been calling for Scrapper nerfs so they can't even solo grey cons. Its easier to believe that than to actually recognize the root of the problem. Foes in the late game are not dangerous enough to make the difference in the defenses between a Tanker and a Scrapper matter. They (the devs) are, thankfully upping the difficulty late game, and hopefully that difference will matter again. Nerfing Scrappers into uselessness or buffing Tankers into uber Scrappers may be your solution, but I'd rather have balance in the game than a monthly "adjustment" to satisfy your current FOTM needs.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hahaha. I know Thorn is an opinionated jerk sometimes, but calling Tanks his "FOTM" is hilarious! So far off...

&lt;pages the Confessor&gt;

This sounds very promising. I especially like that taunt is not artificial, but driven by a (semi)real threat.

I'll hop on TS and test it out the very second I'm able!

Huzzah!

(Yes, I said, "Huzzah!")

[ QUOTE ]
My 'concept' for my character was a super-strong non-weapon using character that didn't take forever-and-a-day to land a punch. Thankfully, there was a powerset that matched that concept. So, yes, I am just a tad bit interested in keeping it that way.

[/ QUOTE ]
Honestly not trying to be snarky, but it sounds to me like you just described a scrapper.

KO blow = AWESOME

I can confirm the following:
<ul type="square">[*]KO Blow at 24 does 82.55 damage to a white-con Warrior. [*]KO Blow has a range of at least 2x that of haymaker [*]I was able to hit an enemy from behind with KO blow from about regular melee distance, while haymaker, jab and punch all "glonged" as out of range[/list]
In short: AWESOME. This power has gone from being on my respec list to my "gotta add slots" list.

*edit* KO Blow on Live also has the same extended range; I just never confirmed it before.

[ QUOTE ]
Krunch, 39 is the highest SS/Inv Tanker I’ve had (and life up to that point seemed fine), although now I’m playing a lower–level tanker on a different server where some friends of mine are. While I have solo'd at times, most of my adventuring is done in smaller groups because I feel the game lends itself best in that format, with larger groups (which I do now and then as well) being chaotic and for the most part un-fun (but that's another debate).

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely true. I find groups &lt;5 to be the best. Especially if you have one of each archetype, so that you can see what's what. 'course, my friends aren't min/max types, so it doesn't really matter. My girlfriend and I do a lot of duoing as Inv/SS and Fire/Fire tanks. I pull, she vaporises.

Ain't love grand?

[ QUOTE ]
The new non-combat system is going to be riddle based. A series of riddles, each correctly answered riddle awards xp when the series is complete you will get an end of mission experience bonus. Then you may enter the next string of riddles. Each series more difficult then the previous, they may or may not require research both in game and out.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's a good thing it's NOT riddles, 'cos if you're as good at riddles as you are at guessing about game systems, you'd have been screwed!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gang,
I'm holding off on touching Super Strength until we tackle a somewhat greater issue with Tankers - namely that they lack that "comic book feel." Specifically, you'd like to see Super Strength be something somewhat, well, "Hulk-ish." But currently, Super Strength is a poor cousin to Scrapper powers - which seems somewhat out of place. Don't worry - what we're looking at as a fix for ALL Tankers addresses this issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

/sigh.

Well guys, consider this news the nail in the coffin. Been great talking with many of you, and I wish you all the very best.

5 weeks, lord knows how many posts and suggestions, and he thinks we all want to be the Hulk.... I give up.

[/ QUOTE ]
Easy, brother. I know you have problems with the whole "Hulk" concept (as evidenced by your dislike of the "madder we get, harder we hit" idea), but don't fret.

We all DO want to be the Hulk in the following ways:
-to dish out and take some damage
-a reason to be respected (or feared) in combat
-to be viable as an archetype both grouped and solo (especially post-30)

I mean, honestly, we have a power called "Rage" already. That's pretty Hulk, but I don't see people complaining about the name, but rather the effect.

Have heart. We NEED people that don't want to be shoehorned to comment on changes. Look how much Genesis' commentary has sparked discussion here. (Thanks, Genesis.)

(Intelligent) Dissenting voices are necessary to operate as checks and balances in these discussions.

*edit* Though maybe you do need a break. At least to get some distance?


Genesis: Okay, now I hear ya. What we really have here is a mindset difference. You are of the “slow and steady wins the race” view, while I am more of the “why should I have to go this slow when others of the same class can go faster?”. I can’t argue with your mindset, nor do I want to. I’m of that mindset, too, but, to me, the inherent imbalance between the secondaries is just too staggering for me to accept.

Statesman's comment gives me hope that there'll be something coming for super strength (and tanks) in the future. I hope you'll stick around to hash those changes out when they come.


Krunch: I wonder as well if the "scrapper" comment was a typo. Perhaps our discussions have had more effect than we think and they're considering making bigger changes to tanks than expected?

[ QUOTE ]
Gang,
I'm holding off on touching Super Strength until we tackle a somewhat greater issue with Tankers - namely that they lack that "comic book feel." Specifically, you'd like to see Super Strength be something somewhat, well, "Hulk-ish." But currently, Super Strength is a poor cousin to Scrapper powers - which seems somewhat out of place. Don't worry - what we're looking at as a fix for ALL Tankers addresses this issue.

[/ QUOTE ]
Holy crap?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And if you had actually read the first post of this thread you would have realized that these changes are being suggested as a balancing point within the AT, not the current game's lack of balance (which I did specifically address).



Why do I play a Tanker? Because I want to. Why do I lobby for changes? Because I would like to see this game improved. Don't begrudge me the opportunity to do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The game improved for whom? For you? Because it’s not for me. I don’t consider these improvements.

And to be frank, you don’t seem to want to play City of Heroes version of a Tanker. You seem more interested in playing an archetype that doesn’t exist that you want to call Tanker. So again, with the archetypes options in mind, why did you choose an existing archetype you didn’t want to play? Because you were hopeful that you could convince the developers to modify it for you?

See, I didn’t enter this game thinking “I want to be a tank type!”. I came into the game with an idea of what kind of hero I wanted to make, perused over the powersets that CoH offered, and decided which matched most closely to my character concept. The Invulnerability and Super-strength pools (and not the names, the individual powers within) were the closest match on this particular idea, and so I ended up being a Tanker simply because it was the archetype that had these pools. And, for the most part, I’ve found most of the powers to be fine. The ones that aren’t (to me) I avoid picking.

Now, maybe Tanker-type-X kicks more rear than I do, but I’m frankly oblivious to that because I don’t sit there running trials against Tanker-type-X to see how I stack up. All I know is that I seem to kick rear too. Does it matter that Tanker-type-X can kick more rear than me so long as I can kick it also? I guess, if you’re the type that feels insecure about that sort of thing. I don’t.

So, when someone comes on here and says “We must make these changes in order for SS Tankers not to suck!” and I comment “I seem to do fine, I certainly don’t feel like I’m sucking..”, and then someone tries to point out “Yes, but compare yourself to Tanker-type-X and then you’ll see how much we suck!”, I’m kind of left thinking “Who the [beep] cares? Did I miss the contest sign-in sheet?” And then, to want to change around the powers I carefully and purposely chose for that silly reason? Nuh-uh. I can’t jump behind a cause like that.


[ QUOTE ]
Finally: 94011 Registered User(s).

That's 50% of the current subscriber base. And a far greater majority of those people who play this game on a long term basis (the target demographic if you will).



Because Statesman wants to be disingenuous about the vocal opinions of those on these boards, doesn't mean he's actually telling the truth..

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize this figure includes everyone that registered in beta, and registration from pre-orders. Three of those registered users are actually me, as I've registered two pre-order boxes (one at the last moment after deciding which prestige power to go with) and a beta account. Of course, I only actually have one real account, but it’s counting all three. It also includes players that don’t even have accounts here anymore because they’ve cancelled their service, and players that registered once and never returned to the forums, and those who simply use it for technical hardware issues. You’re kidding yourself if you think the number of players that actively make comments on balance issues is anywhere close to 50%.

And the idea of the forums being a vocal minority is not a new concept that can be pinned on Statesman. It is the way it has been on virtually every MMO and normal video game to date. Any long term gamer knows that. Most players that pick up a game never visit the forums tied to it.

Anyway, this is veering off track and I’ve said my bit, so someone suggest again that a power like Handclap needs to be completely redesigned or removed so that I can sigh to myself and wonder if people actually play the same game I do.

[/ QUOTE ]Is there anything about the super strength power set that you are unhappy about? Anything at all?

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but it seems to me that you're satisfied with what you're playing right now. If these changes do in fact increase the amount of damage that you can do, or the ease of playing your character, how does that hurt? You've stated that you enjoy knockback. You've also stated that you don't seem to mind the damage you do. If SS gets a minor damage boost to a couple powers, and you have to slot one KB enhancement to return it to its current usefulness, doesn't that negate the loss of an ehancement?

Personally, it seems you're railing against this change to maintain the status quo. I fail to see how increasing damage, decreasing knockback, and giving you access to a damaging AoE is going to decrease your character's effectiveness.

I'm not being rude, I'm honestly confused. Perhaps I just don't know how you make use of these attacks/secondary effects that is so useful.

If I'm wrong, I'll admit it. Any chance you can explain?

Damn fine work, friend.

Thumbs up from me! (Though I still think provoke is artificial and annoying. Perhaps a discussion for another thread? )

&lt;signed&gt;

[ QUOTE ]
Just began researching this myself...

You can use hex values for colors. The only format difference is &lt;color #xxxxxx&gt;. Notice the number sign preceding the 6 digit color value.

What are some values, you ask? I found a color chart at http://www.lynda.com/hexpalette/images/nhue2.gif

There are other places I'm sure.

Happy color chatting all!

[/ QUOTE ]

Furthermore, there also seems to be an alpha/transparency value on the end.

I.e., &lt;bgcolor #ff0000aa&gt; will give you a semi-transparent red bubble. (Which you can get antibiotics to treat, should you be experiencing in real life.)