lionsbane_EU

[ QUOTE ]
Make all AVs and possibly GMs... immune to Taunt.

Pure chaos! It would be so awesome!

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You really hate Blasters, don't you? GMs would just be a death sentence for them if you do this.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if the Tankers taunted but only received the lions share but not all the aggro?

That way the Gm would still be mitigated by the Tanker but would be a threat to everyone on the team attacking.

I also think that if you are defeated you shouldnt be allowed back into the fight for a penalty period of maybe 2 or 3 minutes.

Dying really isnt much of a big deal at the mo but it should be laid out that 2 or 3 deaths can cause problems for the remaining team..

[ QUOTE ]
What will make more casual players buy into and enjoy the PvP aspect of the game has to be the key question.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I never thought I'd say this... I agree with Lionsbane.

[/ QUOTE ]

You really should get out more.

[ QUOTE ]
The guy who set off this argument does have a point in a weird way. PvP just isnt really accessable realistically to a casual player in a sense that it is long term fun to them.

And, because most of the posts I've read are pretty (ive only skimmed) advanced, we're not offering solutions to make PvP more accessable on a basic level, therefore creating more PvPers, some of who will graduate to the advanced levels some posters here are at.

What will make more casual players buy into and enjoy the PvP aspect of the game has to be the key question.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi,

I don't think that there is a "real" solution to the lack of interest in PvP in CoX. It is a side activity of the game ( IMO ) with no repercution for either side.

As an example, when I was playing Daoc in the early days of the game, I was motivated by the RvR aspect because it had a sense, I fought for my realm, I fought for a tangible goal ( the relic keeps which gave your realm a bonus or opened a "PvP" dungeon for the faction with the most keeps ).

[/ QUOTE ]

You've just pretty much covered part of whats wrong with our PvP versus other games versions. Doac offered reasons to get invested in PvP and this game doesn't.

[ QUOTE ]
As others posters said, there is no reward ( with an impact on your character or faction ) in CoX PvP but this is not necessary a flaw ( it made CoX PvP less stressfull IMO ).

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont agree with this because PvP, primarily should be optional. You dont have to get involved in the stress if you dont want too. But, a decent PvP would add options and therefore more playability, for those that want it, if something compelling was installed in the first place.

Right now its just too patchy and uninvolving and pretty much goalless, which excludes a lot of people from trying it, making it hard for those that do enjoy it because there isnt always much opposition about.

And, any MMO activety revolves around goals and achievements. Its no surprise PvP isnt up to too much on CoX because, aside from the PvP/ PvE build issue, there are very few worthwhile goals.

[ QUOTE ]
Comments like "just move forward!" and so on are just dumb imo. Why not just go "Cool, you don't like pvp, i can understand that".

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Because had i answered "Cool, you don't like pvp, i can understand that" it would have made no sense in answer to the post i replying to.

Please read the thread rather than picking 3 words out, doing THAT is just dumb imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe you should have said move around, rather than move forward. Or move in a direction. Or just move. Or manuever your character.
Or how about instigate actions that would propel your charcter from the spot upon which the stalker is focussing upon?
And then you could have avoided all these really petty posts in the first place. And the absurd compultion, which i know too well, to answer them.

I honestly dont know why, when your overall meaning is clear, people pick up on sematics like that but there you go.

[ QUOTE ]
]Anyway, I see that we don't "understand" the word "hardcore" the same way. For me doing something a lot isn't enough to label it as hardcore activity.

[/ QUOTE ]

The guy who set off this argument does have a point in a weird way. PvP just isnt really accessable realistically to a casual player in a sense that it is long term fun to them.

And, because most of the posts I've read are pretty (ive only skimmed) advanced, we're not offering solutions to make PvP more accessable on a basic level, therefore creating more PvPers, some of who will graduate to the advanced levels some posters here are at.

What will make more casual players buy into and enjoy the PvP aspect of the game has to be the key question.

[ QUOTE ]
I want GMs to be rare enough that they'll still be a treat after years of playing --

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Better do sommething about the pathetic risk-reward ratio then. I don't bother with GM's now unless someone wants a badge. They're simply not worth the effort at the moment.

[/ QUOTE ]

But Gms dont DO anything. They are just there, waiting for someone to gather a load of players who then start to blast it until the tree falls down... a total non event.

Lack of awards aside, its plain boring.

The Gms should, in my opinion have a lot more damage, a far faster attack rate. I dont remember anyone ever dying against a GM in a proper fight. I'm sure they have but it must be rare and, against a GM, it shouldnt be.

They should have goals theyre trying to accomplish. (destroy certain buildings? cause chaos in the city? etc ) etc and there should be a marker of some sort to determine if we're preventing them from achieving they're goal or if they're winning.

it should be a super hero event where we really have to struggle and there is a possibility of failure and defeat.

The closest I have really found of an AV truly worth their salt has to be Ghost Widow in RV. She should be a tenplate for all AVs in my opinion cause that lady is tough, full of surprises and beating her is an achievement.

[ QUOTE ]
Nope but they require players skills, "real" one.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
So CoH PvP is carebear because it lacks death penalties, but FPS PvP somehow isn't? Your argument really isn't consistent.

Oh, and at least 10 people died arond the world during the time it took me to write this post.

[/ QUOTE ]

PvP was firmly designed with teaming involved. It was never meant to be solo.

That's primarily because they didnt think PvP through in the first place, even though they announced it prior to launch.

And the game simply hasnt got the metrics to encourage wholesale team PvP. Plus, it falls apart a bit because some ATs, Tankers in particular,fall flat on their faces. If I ever do fight against a team and I taunt 2 or 3 of the villians, I go down fast.

Plus you have the fact that IO and sets aside, there is a distinct difference between a PvP and a PvE build.

If I go to RV, I know I'll see some die hard villians there who have Pvp primed the toons and that, I go in with a massive disadvantage.

Plus certain powers are anti thematic yet available and maybe shouldn't be in PvP. (aid self is a classic example of this. After all, in solo melee, against an aid self player, you really could be there all day.)

This sort of thing puts me off going in the first place. So, enabling players to create a PvP build that can activate in the correct zone and/ or disabling one or two powers that arguably dont match the PvP spirit (or maybe creating one or two powers for the occasion,only for pvP use) may spice things up a bit.

And giving PvP some genuine, understandable and achievable goals wouldn't hurt either.

[ QUOTE ]
you do imply that if the dev's don't follow your plan and do X, Y and Z the game is doomed, so yes, your are a doom sayer in that sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

I state firmly that If the game doesnt junp to the plate its in trouble. And I have seen warning signs recently that are concerning. I also state that if the game does get its house in order itll be fine. It was just a debating point that has turned into something else entirely now.
Calling it doomsaying is ludicrous. Doomsaying is me saying, as I did with Cryptic, with this lot at the helm the game is gonna go into freefall. I'm not saying that at all.

[ QUOTE ]
It's more to do with intelligent posters.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
So anyone who disagrees with you is unintellegent? Good way to make friends.

[/ QUOTE ]

Blimey. I deleted that. You're quick off the mark. Nope btw. I never said that. Dont think much of people who put words in other peoples mouths though.

[ QUOTE ]
By that I mean people who can read what is actually written

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
You mean in exactly the way that you can't?

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm

[ QUOTE ]
it is hard for me to think I can have a meaningful conversation with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
It's hard for you to have a meaningful conversation with anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok

[ QUOTE ]
You clearly dont have a clue about what i'm saying in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Yup, I think that goes for most of us.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok ok
[ QUOTE ]
But those who are not disegenious on these boards know I could have.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Who? Name one.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
it brings out the little people who try to give themselves a name by popping at me.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think popping at you would get anyone a name, unless you can get a name for shooting fish in a barrel.

It's funny though.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's up big boy? Me saying to you that we havent had cross words for a while get you all hot and panty?

Oh I know. I said crossed swords didnt I? Cant get too careful with all you professors of semantics about now can I?

People like you remind me of a gang beating up someone and you put in a kick just so you're one of em. Not that i'm beaten up mind you.

[ QUOTE ]
Or just one of those little old men in a scruffy jacket with a wooden plackard around their necks that says "THE END OF THE WORLD IS NIGH" in beg red letters.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
They only need to be right once, you know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just curious Lief. I have time for you and am wondering if you think im a doomsayer?

And when, in all this, I stated the game is doomed? That is what a doomsayer is isnt it?

[ QUOTE ]
I think most of us are still waiting on that list with great anticipation. Lionsbane might very well be our new prophet of doom!

[/ QUOTE ]

I just deleted a reply to you. Judging by your posts youre fairly young and I shouldn't be scathing toward you. Sorry.

[ QUOTE ]
God, why even bother arguing with Lionsbane? He's so set in his own point of view that he couldn't possible change it, even if it would hurdle him to certain doom. Because he simply thinks he is that much better than the rest of us.

Just stop it, please ><

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop what?

[ QUOTE ]

I'm referring to the commercial aspect of SGs (as I always do).

My overall point revolves around the fact that the large successful, in terms of activety and attitude with in the group, are ones that help keep casual players happier and more involved with the gamne in general.

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
See, I think you're applying your own preferences to quite a large amount of players who they don't apply to.

Certainly there are players who play MMO's for the "organized community" aspect. However, there are also a lot of players who do not want an SG at all, or who simply prefer theirs to be a chat channel for group of friends. Of course, I don't know the actual proportion of these groups compared to the total playerbase, but neither do you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Max I dont need to know the numbers. Go round the game looking at the players you see. You'll see 10% of em, if that arent part of an SG. And, if you look at, say level 20s, the figure is less than that. but, as everyone here is hitting me with semantics, no i guess not everyone is in an Sg.

[ QUOTE ]
Therefore, SG improvements really aren't the only, or quite possibly even one of the best ways to increase the amount of time people stick with the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only way? No. The best way? Absolutely yes.
This is a team centric game. Where as other games have lots to do enabling players to play a soloish route, this game is fight, fight, fight. It's repititious to an almost ridiculous degree.
The single thing in its favour is the teaming tools.
And the Super groups. It's what keeps going on same old same old, entertaining and fresh. And offers a diversity.

These new games coming out have something in common: they propose to have "all the things you expect to see in an MMO"
This game, to date, doesnt. So it needs something else.

Look, honestly, If you dont think SGs are key to the games success, then fine. And if you think that the devs have given SG leader sufficent tools to run the groups properly rather than having to do it all ourselves, then fine again.

[ QUOTE ]
The ops question was "are Tankers becoming obselete."


[/ QUOTE ]

No, the OPs question was "Are melee ATs slowly becoming obselete??"

[ QUOTE ]
Last time I looked tankers whern't the only melee AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh shoot me LOL. You do agree that the overall point does include Tankers? In that they are of of the primary melee groups?
And that becoming obselete isnt a million miles away from being obelete?

So did i say anything not pertaining to the question?

Semantics. And those that pick up on them. Sheesh.

[ QUOTE ]
Im not here to insult you or anyone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Cudda fooled me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? You and I havent crossed swords in a long time and if we ever do I wont be the one firing the first shot.

[ QUOTE ]
Y'know... I have this feeling that you've totally missed the point of both SG's and the game as a whole; that of having FUN. When it becomes work, of or no benefit; then it's time to stop playing.

I personally couldn't care LESS what the mix of the team is. Good, bad, insanely stupid. The criteria *I* apply to a good team is FUN FUN FUN.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you please get of my bloody back??? The ops question was "are Tankers becoming obselete."

I answered. In a non optimised team no. That was it.

I never ever pick a team. I join em and dont know or care if theyre good or bad. I just play.

Stop hitting me with semantics.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure. But at least it would attract an audience cause im alive, controversal and always trying to look for better solutions.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
REALLY not sure you'd want to be on P&T's TV show.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont think one with you would attract an audience beyond the paint drying society. I mean that nicely of course.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Nice or not, that's a direct personal insult. Tut tut.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im not here to insult you or anyone else. I wasnt happy with your reality comment quite honestly so slapped you back.
i have been on the recieving end of many of your barbed smiley comments before, FFM.

[ QUOTE ]
How do you measure if an SG is successful? The amount of members? The average time members sped in the SG? The amount of prestige earned?

[/ QUOTE ]

All three. But I'm not being entirely fair here. A succesful Sg can comprise of 10 players who are friends and happy if that's what you want. So, in that sense it's relative.

I'm referring to the commercial aspect of SGs (as I always do).

My overall point revolves around the fact that the large successful, in terms of activety and attitude with in the group, are ones that help keep casual players happier and more involved with the gamne in general.

This helps keep them .interested in the overall game and in turn helps keep the subs going.
The improvement of the game is always my focal point.

SGs are a tool that the devs SHOULD HAVE fully utilised because basically, the more good SGs there are, the more people play the game long term.

And that's what I'm interested in.

Sorry, but if I play the game then in my mind i invest in it and want it to be as successful, the servers as full, as possible. I want to enjoy to the max and I want the people in charge to do the right things in that direction.

By the way, Tanks are still valuable members of the team. Its only the optimised ones that dont gain benefit from them but then, thats true of any class.

I've done hundereds of missions, as im sure everyone has, without a defender or controller. And as long as the mix is ok, then we're fine. In fact, that's the time Tankers really do become the big man (person) of the team.

[ QUOTE ]
And how do you know that, hmmm? You don't know me, you don't know all my characters. How can you possibly know that I may or may not be the leader of an SG? Do you base it on my lack of posts about SG's? Maybe I'm happy with how my SG is run, and know enough about the game to not need to ask questions?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if youre having a laugh here. We have discussed this before which is how I know.
And unless you have decided to build one since then you arent a leader. And if you are a leader of a LARGE SUCCESFUL one then you wouldnt dispute the crying need for major SG attention. Which was the point that brought you over to my post in the first place.

[ QUOTE ]
You DON'T know the answer to that, so you can't say what I do or don't know. Just like you can't say what Max does or doesn't know. Knowledge does not begin and end with you, matey.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Max thinks that SGs are sufficently or nearly sufficently loved by this game then he isnt a main leader of an SG. Unless hew enjoys doing the work the game should be doing for him.
Can I be any clearer?

[ QUOTE ]
You cant comment on how much value an SG gives to its members because you cant look at it from the ground up.

And respectfully, you cant comment on how much sheer out of gameplay hours is required to maintain such a group.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
You know, there's a great show on American TV I really must put you up for; they'd LOVE you!

Penn & Teller host it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure. But at least it would attract an audience cause im alive, controversal and always trying to look for better solutions.

I dont think one with you would attract an audience beyond the paint drying society. I mean that nicely of course.

[ QUOTE ]
If you knew how bad most of our SG members are at playing the game, you'd realise how hilarious that comment was.

[/ QUOTE ]

You insult your members. I dont care if my members are lousy players as long as they follow the spirit of the Sg and contribute in some way. That could simply be by chatting on the SG channel.

My SG has a full mix of good bad and ugly players and as I say, that's fine by me. Yiou dont have to be a good player to join. Juist a friendly, sociable one.

Besides, its the SGs remit to help lousy players improve if thats what they want.

Boy, chinese whispers eh?

[ QUOTE ]
You cant possibly be a Leader of a successful Sg and not understand that the game needs massive SG support. Unless you view CoH as work not play that is.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
*ahem*

You're not Max, so you can't POSSIBLY say what he can or cannot do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahem. This is off topic. However, of all the things you ARE conversant in, being the main leader of a succesful SG isnt one of them.

You're the one who cant possibily know what's involved in getting one up to scratch and keeping it there for a long period of time. And 80% of what we have to do should be done for us. Starting with global SG, ability to email any and every member and a way to count how many members ytou actually have without counting down every time you want to know.
That's just the beginning.

One thing you'll never get me on is this subject.

You cant comment on how much value an SG gives to its members because you cant look at it from the ground up.

And respectfully, you cant comment on how much sheer out of gameplay hours is required to maintain such a group.

[ QUOTE ]
Strangely in the software business limited trials are rife. Some of them do go down the "full features for 30 days", but a lot of them go down the route of "use this free!! (but with limited features unless you pay $29.95 to register). Ridiculous in my opinion

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a completely different scenario and you ought to know it. If I was wanted a certain function (the ability to obliterate all files from the comp for instance), I could use the free trial, say thank you very much and never use that particular product again. I could simply download another one.Thats why softwear companies agree with each other to make trials that dont offer full functionality. Because they all suffer the same problem.

This is not the same thing at all.

[ QUOTE ]

I'm not actually sure that this limited trial business has anything going for it in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Then you really need a course on MMO economics. CoH didn't really have a problem before I9, but post-inventions there certainly were requirements for trial restrictions.

The only successful sub-based MMO's currently on the market that hava no real need for limits are games like EVE, where it's not really viable to gather large amounts of money by using trial accounts. Of course, EVE also has developer-sanctioned ways of buying in-game currency, so they also don't really have the spam problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the reasons, alongside my sons experiences that prompted this thread was the fact they actually increased the rerstrictions during a patch recently. that is not an indicator that they have any thoughts to revisit it in the near future.

If you read my overall posts, in fact the one I just wrote, I don't dispute as such them operating certain limitations.
I can see the inf limit. i can see an argument to allow a trialist membership to an SG but not to a base. I can even see a logic to prevent LOCAL and broadcasting chat. (which they dont.) But the simple fact is they are breaking eggs to make their omemlete.

Fact. My son, who is bright, a keen gamer etc etc, was not enjoying the trial and would have quit if I hadnt teamed with him and persuaded him to carry on. Now his trial issues are over he is enjoying it. He is part of an Sg that helps him team and he can chat to people and suddenly the game is taking the shape that makes it long term playable.

Not enery trialist will drop the game because of the restrictions but a disproportionate number of them will.

There is no business on earth that wants to discourage people it is applying a trial to NOT to buy the product is there? Well, that is precisely what these restrictions are doing.

The fact that there are ways to exploit an unlimited trial is NOT sufficent reason to punitively restrict a trialist.

I don't need a course in MMMO economics. It's more a course in MMO (and general) common sense thats required here. And it's the person(s) that issue deicts like this, without looking at the knock on effect of this kind of action, that needs to take it.

Finally, just to cover your exact point, if there was a choice only between the current restrictions (less people actually take up the game) and less griefing ( and no restrictions at all (a few annoying emails emails and tells here and there)I would choose the latter not the former and expect the developers to deal with it another way.

[ QUOTE ]
In what way does that change affect game balance in any shape or form?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
By bringing what is quite likely the most overpowered (at least for ST damage) powerset closer to the other sets.

[/ QUOTE ]

How so?

[ QUOTE ]
Especially given that the game is (including beta) 5 years old?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
...your point being? Do you honestly think they have achieved perfect balance during those 5 years?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I have to say firstly, perfect balance cant happen.

Secondly, If they havent achieved a decent level of balance after 5 years, that SIXTY MONTHS (i am refering to 5 year old sets not newer ones) then maybe they ought to just let them be, dont you think?

[ QUOTE ]
And that Energy Transfer (and the set itself) has a massive trade off?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
What, a whooping 9% off your base HP? You call that a massive trade off?

[/ QUOTE ]

An interesting comment that really does make me wonder if you appreciate what balance should be.

Ahem. First off trade off no 1 is you wait 35 levels to get your first decent attack on Energy meee. And for several years 35 levels took a whole lot longer then than it does now.

That in itself justifies a trade off, cause what mug would play a set that hasnt got a decent attack if they didnt know their was a pay off was coming?

Second : that 9% (isnt it 10?) you talk about is 9% every fire off. So in the course of 1 fight that could amount to 30-40%. Now given we're Tankers who take the aggro that could in some quarters be regarded as risky. Hence the pay off to that risk is a mighty attack.

Thirdly; EM has no (please dnt mention whirling hands) AOE attack or damage mitigation.
my S/S Tanker can handclap them away and so avoid damage, or footstomp them, avoiding damage AND softening them up for my next attack or for the rest of the team.

(In fact if you add the fact they take more damage per fight than any AoE tank then add the 9% health deduction you get even more trade off.)

En/Melee has none of that. It is pure one on one. I think thats sufficent trade off for one powerful punch dont you?

[ QUOTE ]
As for the SG crack, you are absolutely correct as any leader of any successful Sg will tell you.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
You missed the point completely, Castle is a power dev, and has nothing to do with SG's.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didnt miss your point. I was being ironic by saying in your unwarrented saracasm you hit on a truth.

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and being a co-leader of a successful SG, we're doing quite fine as we are.

[/ QUOTE ]

You cant possibly be a Leader of a successful Sg and not understand that the game needs massive SG support. Unless you view CoH as work not play that is.