[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
8% of the player base has a level 50
A smaller proportion has multiple 50's
[/ QUOTE ]
Ya know.... I remember when this number came out. I didn't buy it then, and I still don't buy it.
It only took me 4 months to get Bill to 50. Without powerleveling. (Mind you for the most of that four months I was on an extended vacation so I played 12 hours a day)
Celmor got to 50 in like 6 months. Maybe less.. can't remember when I-3 came out. Again, no powerleveling beyond less than a level. (Had to find out what was so wonderful about wolf-herding. Bored me to tears.)
If I can get 2 50s in under a year, working now 40 hrs a week, with a son and wife, taking care of dogs, only getting long game time runs when everyone's crashed or I take a day off....
I just find it impossible to believe that only 8% of the playerbase has a 50.
Just doesn't jive with logic.
[/ QUOTE ]
Played on US servers from August to January, took time to play WoW February-May, and play on EU servers from June on. Play 6PM-12PM Tuesdays and Fridays, 10AM-12PM Sundays, and the odd hours the other days, so that makes 20-30 hours/week. My highest character is still an old character somewhere at 43-44 on Infinity, so no level 50s for me. 
On the other hand, I've filled all my available character slots on the US servers (I did run amok during the winterlord incident) with one account, and all slots on the English-speaking EU servers with two accounts, so I have a lot of alts...
Don't assume that all people are so single-track that they wait with starting their second character until they've run their first all the way to 50. For some of us it's not getting to 50 that is the goal - it's having characters we can have fun with that's important. Getting one of them to 50 means that it's over for that character, and no fun to be had with it anymore.
[ QUOTE ]
Also remember that the statistic itself doesn't communicate important qualifiers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not to mention that even the low number may not mean anything.
8% of players have a level 50. 4% of players read the forums.
4% of players reading the forums is apparently enough to stick in the Kill Skuls badge anyway.
Current main:
Schrodinger's Gun, Dual Pistols/Mental Blaster, Virtue
Avatar: Becky Miyamoto from Pani Poni Dash. Roulette roulette~
Good points from both Flaming1 and Tuft_.
I didn't take alt-ism into account. I only have 5 characters... all on Pinnacle. I might still have one on Virtue.
That's it. I build a new character... play it up to around 10th... if it's not making me jump for joy, I delete it.
I've probably deleted 30-40 characters.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
8% of the player base has a level 50
A smaller proportion has multiple 50's
[/ QUOTE ]
Ya know.... I remember when this number came out. I didn't buy it then, and I still don't buy it.
...
I just find it impossible to believe that only 8% of the playerbase has a 50.
Just doesn't jive with logic.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I can believe this number. There are two "normal" ways to count this statistic, and either way can be very skewed:
8% of the active accounts has a level 50 (and most players that reached 50 closed their account).
-or-
8% of every account ever created has a 50 (and there are probably a bazillion accounts that lasted no more than the 2 week trial period).
In either case, the statistic can be skewed such that you don't really know the 'true' percentage of 50's, or potential 50's, simply because so many people quit because it's too hard/grinding at the mid/lower levels, ran out of new content after hitting 50, didn't like the game, thought the game cost too much, got nerfed to the point they don't care anymore, etc., etc., etc.
Any statistic can be interpreted and manipulated to say whatever you want:
8% level 50's means there isn't enough population to devote content to them.
8% level 50's means that there isn't enough content for the 50's, therefore a lot of them quit.
8% level 50's means that the low/mid level content is too hard and people quit before getting there.
...
[ QUOTE ]
Also consider that your personal sample size may be self-selecting. That is, you have a L50, you play with other players with L50s. It may be less likely that you play with players with only lower level toons or players who log in very infrequently.
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't forget that this works both ways. I could easily have had 4 50s by now, but I intentionally left my higher characters alone and built up alts so that I would not hit 50. Why? Because I knew there was nothing to do there yet. (Kheldians got a big 'meh' from me on concept from the day we first got details.) My toons hit the mid 40s in order of interest in the toons. I did not paralell them, by and large. I played one at a time until I needed to stop (close to 50, AVs, etc), then switched.
Certainly I don't think everyone does this. But it is out there.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
8% of the player base has a level 50
A smaller proportion has multiple 50's
[/ QUOTE ]
Ya know.... I remember when this number came out. I didn't buy it then, and I still don't buy it.
It only took me 4 months to get Bill to 50. Without powerleveling. (Mind you for the most of that four months I was on an extended vacation so I played 12 hours a day)
Celmor got to 50 in like 6 months. Maybe less.. can't remember when I-3 came out. Again, no powerleveling beyond less than a level. (Had to find out what was so wonderful about wolf-herding. Bored me to tears.)
If I can get 2 50s in under a year, working now 40 hrs a week, with a son and wife, taking care of dogs, only getting long game time runs when everyone's crashed or I take a day off....
I just find it impossible to believe that only 8% of the playerbase has a 50.
Just doesn't jive with logic.
[/ QUOTE ]
Edit: I see Flaming's and your subsequent comment, but I want to leave this response here to merely echo the other messages reminding people that we are not necessarily representative of the player base.
Your logic omits the most important factor in all statistical analysis. Your selected subset does not necessarily bear out to the entire world.
That is the problem so many of us make when posting. "If I and none of my friends..." does not mean anything unless my friends are the entire base.
I have a level 33, 24, 23... I have no 50s. I like to make new alts. I do not assume everyone is like me.
I do not like PvP. I do not assume everyone is like me.
I hate the Phase Shift change (perhaps due to I do not PvP?). I cannot assume everyone else feels the same way.
I will stop with examples now.
The devs here do, to their credit, communicate with the players. Too often to their own detriment.
total kick to the gut
This is like having Ra's Al Ghul show up at your birthday party.
As a habitual player of tankers, I am glad to have this assurance. Tankers have to rely on the game's AI to pull enemies into melee range and keep them there; even if our defenses and our taunts were reliable in PvP, we still wouldn't have much of a role to play there. PvP is hard for melee characters generally, and hardest for melee characters who rely on broad coverage damage resistance to outlast enemies in a battle of attrition.
I don't like PvP anyways, because I think it will coarsen the tone of the game, so I don't mind. But if it turned out that there were epic ATs and other significant new content that could only be unlocked by PvPing to capture and defend loot, I would be gravely disappointed.
<《 New Colchis / Guides / Mission Architect 》>
"At what point do we say, 'You're mucking with our myths'?" - Harlan Ellison
[ QUOTE ]
The changes in I5 had very little to do with PvP and a lot to do with boring PvE. It's that simple. No conspiracy there - I think I've stated this several times.
[/ QUOTE ]
Edit : Removed emotional response.
To further comment, with only a handful of exceptions, every player that I know has at least one L50. But then, the community and friends I've built up over the past year+ of playing kind of weeds out most all of the players who are just starting, or don't yet have a L50.
What I'm saying is that there are likely other layers of data that substantially alter the interpretation of the data, depending on which ones you take into the account. Only Cryptic and NCSoft have those numbers.
On a tangential note, numbers have a pesky way of playing perceptual tricks. It's not the numbers themselves; it's the temptation to interpret numbers as hard-and-fast. It's easy to forget that numbers are simply abstract representations with which we communicate ideas and relationships. As important as they are, the numbers themselves cannot be any more important than what the numbers mean.
[ QUOTE ]
To further comment, with only a handful of exceptions, every player that I know has at least one L50. But then, the community and friends I've built up over the past year+ of playing kind of weeds out most all of the players who are just starting, or don't yet have a L50.
What I'm saying is that there are likely other layers of data that substantially alter the interpretation of the data, depending on which ones you take into the account. Only Cryptic and NCSoft have those numbers.
On a tangential note, numbers have a pesky way of playing perceptual tricks. It's not the numbers themselves; it's the temptation to interpret numbers as hard-and-fast. It's easy to forget that numbers are simply abstract representations with which we communicate ideas and relationships. As important as they are, the numbers themselves cannot be any more important than what the numbers mean.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you an actuary? 
total kick to the gut
This is like having Ra's Al Ghul show up at your birthday party.
you know this is what gets me about you people who say statesman is lying. He has flat out said the changes made to I5 were due to what he perceived as boring PVE. Point Blank, no way to misinterpret or spin into anything other then what it is.. the I5 nerfs were PVE related. You say he's lying and the best reason I've seen is that you can't think of what PVE situation would call for a certain nerf but you can think of a PVP situation. Just because a PVP situation fits doesn't mean its the reason. Being a developer means that you have to look at things from many different angles so its quite possible he's seeing things from a perspective you are not. Also ask yourselves this, what does he have to gain by lying to you? If he lies and it is actually prooven that he has lied the game as a whole is hurt because the players will lose faith in his credibility, the media will have a field day with it and NCSoft and Cryptic would earn a reputiation similar to SOEs. So if your going to accuse the man of lying, please be prepared to back up your statements with fact instead of conjecture.
[ QUOTE ]
Are you an actuary?
[/ QUOTE ]
No, but I play one on Tee Vee.
Actually, I'm in Research Science. Data, statistical analysis of the data, followed by interpretive analysis of the data can be one of those keep-you-up-at-night things if you're not careful.
[ QUOTE ]
So if your going to accuse the man of lying, please be prepared to back up your statements with fact instead of conjecture.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've said it elsewhere, the problem with conspiracy theory is that you can't ever disprove it.
Even if God Above Himself carved out The Truth in stone, a true tinfoil hatter would still easily dismiss it as part of the conspiracy.
You know what you guys are right. This place would be much better off without all the conspiracy theorists around. I mean, if the devs say that Regen scrappers can plow through a dozen +8 bosses it must be true, right?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Erm. No. PvP will be an optional part of gameplay. Always.
[/ QUOTE ]
Should I take this comment to heart, like I did the "PvP will not effect PvE" comments and "everyone will be able to solo in this game/we will be catering to the casual players" type comments from pre CoH beta, only to find out later that "Well, that's not really what we meant"? Or should I go ahead and assume now that this really means "At this time, the message I want people to hear, but is up for revision at my earliest convience, is....."?
[ QUOTE ]
The changes in I5 had very little to do with PvP and a lot to do with boring PvE. It's that simple. No conspiracy there - I think I've stated this several times.
[/ QUOTE ]
LOL and it gets funnier each time. Take one example. Invulnerability. Invuln could have been adjusted in a million different ways. The most obvious of which was to reduce Invincibility and leave the concept and relationship to the genre intact. Instead we got this mess of useless passive powers and one power, that has nothing to do conceptually with being invulnerable, as the crown jewel of the set. The changes to Invulnerability actually promote the type of behavior the powerset was supposedly changed to reduce.
Many, many players have been baffled as to why Invulnerability was changed in such a way. The most obvious answer?......PvP. Resistance based sets would be far to hard to wear down in a PvP type enviroment. Defense based sets however are quite easy for your average PC to overcome.
Now why would it make sense to remove the core of a powerset, the very thing people take the set for...to emulate and force the set to rely on cheesy game mechanics? To make it vulnerable in PvP of course. The invuln changes really don't make sense in any other light.
And just to note....there you go with the fun/unfun stuff again. You might get a kick out of getting whacked 12 straight times in Super Mario but I don't. No matter how many times you tell me I didn't have fun in I1, 2, and 3 I know I did. My regen scrapper ran every mission, every taskforce, gathered every badge....all of the things you specifically said Regen scrappers didn't do, and most of all I had fun doing it, despite again the fact that you told me I really didn't.
Now, that said, did there need to be changes made to make the game more dynamic and more engaging. Did something need to be done about dumb as rocks mob AI, cheesy game play tactics, and mind numbing button mashing fights? Yep, sure did. Did I5 do that? Not by a long shot. The mobs are still dumb as rocks, damage still trumps all, there is still very little need for tactics above raw power.
Sure will be easier to balance CoH and CoV powersets though.
[ QUOTE ]
As for the supposed "emphasis" on PvP - I think you'll see that it's just ONE part of City of Villains. It has PvE content levels 1 to 50.
[/ QUOTE ]
Guess I'll have to wait and see on that one. My 16+ months of subscription time hasn't garnered me a CoV beta slot yet, despite all the 12+ month invites going out. 
I have noticed one thing though. I don't think I've seen a dev mention or talk about CoV without placing major emphasis on the PvP aspects of it. I understand the marketing angle and trying to tap that customer base, but I've seen very little about the PvE aspects of CoV. Why should I expect the game to play out differently?
[ QUOTE ]
We'll continue to add new PvE content (which I5 did exclusively, I might add) in the future.
[/ QUOTE ]
I sure hope so. It's what your playerbase craves at this point. Might be nice to get an Issue not riddled with game changing nerfs sometime in the future too. Oh, and for the love of pete, give Regen a break. The set is a complete abomination now, you have succesfully made what used to be the single most fun powerset in the game into a complete pain in the [censored]. Can we go just ONE issue without me having to respec my scrapper?
[/ QUOTE ]
Nicely put.
[ QUOTE ]
You know what you guys are right. This place would be much better off without all the conspiracy theorists around. I mean, if the devs say that Regen scrappers can plow through a dozen +8 bosses it must be true, right?
[/ QUOTE ]
you have a link to that because last I hcecked states was prety set on the rule of 3when it comes to soloing (3 white con mobs to a hero*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You know what you guys are right. This place would be much better off without all the conspiracy theorists around. I mean, if the devs say that Regen scrappers can plow through a dozen +8 bosses it must be true, right?
[/ QUOTE ]
you have a link to that because last I hcecked states was prety set on the rule of 3when it comes to soloing (3 white con mobs to a hero*
[/ QUOTE ]
LOL, weren't around for the I4 Regen nerfs were you? 
[ QUOTE ]
You know what you guys are right. This place would be much better off without all the conspiracy theorists around. I mean, if the devs say that Regen scrappers can plow through a dozen +8 bosses it must be true, right?
[/ QUOTE ]
Hyperbole.
What you imply, and what I take issue with, is that the Devs having borked that test means that they're also wrong about Defiance, Phase Shift, and retroactively, Purple Patch.
Do you see what I'm getting at here?
Take each instance as you see them. You're free to choose to see patterns or not. Some of them may actually even be there. However to forgo direct evidence is one thing. As far as the Dev/Playerbase relationship is concerned, to reject the principle of good faith from either party, frankly, forestalls any further communication.
If you're not capable of taking them on good faith, then the word for that is "grudge".
Your agenda was made clear long ago, we get it.
[ QUOTE ]
you have a link to that because last I hcecked states was prety set on the rule of 3when it comes to soloing (3 white con mobs to a hero*
[/ QUOTE ]
Last I checked, States retracted that, largely because of SOs. Now it's "more like" three red minions to a hero at higher levels when soloing.
I have to add "more like" because I remember that's what he said, and I know that some people will point out all the various combinations that are not exactly three minions.
Current main:
Schrodinger's Gun, Dual Pistols/Mental Blaster, Virtue
Avatar: Becky Miyamoto from Pani Poni Dash. Roulette roulette~
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you have a link to that because last I hcecked states was prety set on the rule of 3when it comes to soloing (3 white con mobs to a hero*
[/ QUOTE ]
Last I checked, States retracted that, largely because of SOs. Now it's "more like" three red minions to a hero at higher levels when soloing.
I have to add "more like" because I remember that's what he said, and I know that some people will point out all the various combinations that are not exactly three minions.
[/ QUOTE ]
well in either case that is still a far cry from "plowing through a dozen +8 bosses" I don't think ANY AT should be capable of that
[ QUOTE ]
well in either case that is still a far cry from "plowing through a dozen +8 bosses" I don't think ANY AT should be capable of that
[/ QUOTE ]
... yeah, I think we've all pretty much established that no AT can do that anyway.
Current main:
Schrodinger's Gun, Dual Pistols/Mental Blaster, Virtue
Avatar: Becky Miyamoto from Pani Poni Dash. Roulette roulette~
LOL way to completely miss the point gang.
I was making a bit of commentary on the many uses of the term "Conspiracy Theorists" I've seen in this thread and where that all started.
It all happened to start with the I4 regen nerfs and the devs claims of how overpowered Regen was. Their examples included Regen doing such amazing things as solo'ing large groups of +8 bosses. They even went as far as to provide demo "proof" of this feat, a post in which Statesman made a snide comment about us "conspiracy theorists". Well, low and behold, their test enviroment was completely borked.
Apologies were made and thanks given, of course it did nothing to change the course of the nerfs, but I guess that could be viewed as a seperate issue.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You know what you guys are right. This place would be much better off without all the conspiracy theorists around. I mean, if the devs say that Regen scrappers can plow through a dozen +8 bosses it must be true, right?
[/ QUOTE ]
Hyperbole.
What you imply, and what I take issue with, is that the Devs having borked that test means that they're also wrong about Defiance, Phase Shift, and retroactively, Purple Patch.
Do you see what I'm getting at here?
Take each instance as you see them.
[/ QUOTE ]
I loathe, despise, detest the Phase Shift hack and hope they alter it to be one way in PvP and another in PvE. But that is besides your point...
I saw a funny skit on a Seattle TV show (or was it Comedy Central?) about 10 1/2 or 11 1/2 years ago "Who Killed J.F.K. Today?" Everyone except Oswald.
total kick to the gut
This is like having Ra's Al Ghul show up at your birthday party.
[ QUOTE ]
The changes in I5 had very little to do with PvP and a lot to do with boring PvE. It's that simple. No conspiracy there - I think I've stated this several times.
[/ QUOTE ]
If this was your goal, you should take a second look. CoH had very fun and exciting PvE for more than a year. People could try and do a wide variety of things to face enemies. They could invent fun new ways to play, rather than the predictable and boring formula of 1 hero = 3 minions. Things that were fun in CoH before are now not possible, or possible only with a precise mix of powers spanning multiple archetypes.
Let's face it: People gathered huge herds of mobs because it was FUN! It may not have been balanced vis-a-vis risk versus reward (though nobody posts the herding attempts that end in horrible defeat), but it was fun and entertaining, and CoH was the only game where it was possible. It made people feel like super heroes!
People attempted to solo Arch-Villains because it was fun! It was not easy, and for many not possible. The forums didn't receive many tales of how an arch-villain stomped a lone hero into the ground three times before the hero gave up. But for people who were bored with the standard 3-mob spawns, an Arch-Villain presented a fun and exciting challenge. For those who found a way to triumph, it provided immense pride and satisfaction, with a feeling of heroism: "I have done the impossible."
People mezzed huge spawns of mobs because it was fun! It was a ticking time-bomb of aggro, and they were racing against the clock to defuse it. Each time they succeeded, they would consider tackling a larger group the next time. It made them feel heroic: "I can put an army to sleep."
How many can we gather?
How much can we withstand?
How far can we push the limits?
These things were fun. But they were not balanced. They were not formulaic.
I5 was not targeting boring PvE. It was targeting imbalance. Balance is important for PvP, but it is rarely fun and even less rarely achievable.
You may even believe that fun was your goal. But look again: You've removed many kinds of fun, and bolstered a very narrow form. There is fun in challenge, and in balance, but these are not the only kinds of fun... Or rather, they weren't the only kinds until I5.
The fun has gone out for me. Perhaps that's why I've gone from 20 hours a week to 2 since I5 hit. I thank you for that: I have my life back. And I thank you for how fun it used to be: It was very entertaining. But the fun is gone and my friends have already left. I'm just hanging on for nostalgia, but even nostalgia isn't what it used to be...
[ QUOTE ]
Just doesn't jive with logic.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, it just doesn't jive with your experience.
Not all CoH players play as much as you do, some more so, apparently, most, less.
A substantial portion of the MMO market is given to players who hop between games. A little bit of WoW, a little bit of EQ, a little bit of CoH. Some of those players even choose to keep accounts open, despite not playing them.
Also remember that the statistic itself doesn't communicate important qualifiers.
Those numbers may include the number of total accounts may include inactive, or partially active accounts. It may also be further obscured by players with multiple accounts.
Also consider that your personal sample size may be self-selecting. That is, you have a L50, you play with other players with L50s. It may be less likely that you play with players with only lower level toons or players who log in very infrequently.