[ QUOTE ]
So you dont think for example phase shift was put on a timer as people could stealth through entire series of missons with not thought or or risk.
That People have 15-20 Fire imps out wasnt overpowerring the PvE game, and making it too easy.
That I5 as a whole was a rebalancing of the dynamic, which reduces the ability of a single charcater to solo an entire mission set for 8. Which may have been fun for one person, but 7 people /em boomboxing werent being challanged one bit.
the gloabl defence chnage orineted for PvP - hah dont make me laugh, take the poorest perfoming sets (+def based), reduce their capabilities, rescue PvE mobs accuracy a bit, but not touch player accuracy. yes sooooo PvP based that one.
[/ QUOTE ]
I solo Alot and Playing a Fire troller to 32 to even get imps sucks badly. So no I dont feel the pets were overpowering considering how long it took get there and the deaths I suffered with both my Illusion and fire troller. Can the pets be annoying yes, But even with that many pets i still died so I never felt super over powered I couldnt take an AV solo no matter how many pets I had and Bosses were still tuff too.
As far as Phase Shift, well it has its uses, I never really liked it much anyway..can fight anything. To each his own I guess.
[ QUOTE ]
One thing to keep in mind about the number of 50s is many people, like me have one and then about 8 alts on each server. So yes I have a 50 but I have a ton of non-50s that make 8% actually seem likely to me. Even on my home server I only have one post 40 and that's my 50. Everyone else is all over level wise. I come up with a story for a hero and I make him. I don't always play him far but I do have like 4 or 5 servers filled with sub level 10 guys.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've been playing since May of 04 and I have 1 level 50 toon. That's me playing 3-4 hours a day, 6-7 days a week.
I spend a lot of time on alts, talking to people, and doing things like raids that don't net me any level gains. Also a lot of badge hunting.
Formerly "Back Alley Brawler"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sure, there's still been nerfs, but I suspect they weren't as severe as they were going to be had the playerbase not caught the problems with the developers' test environment.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll let you all take this where you will so I'll just point out that not a single thing changed after finding out their internal test server had a horrible bug on it.
Actually I take that back, they did end up nerfing MoG between that time and the Issue going Live.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed.
The question is: "Despite the bug, did the developers wind up deciding that the changes were appropriate for the way the game was balanced on live?" The answer, apparently, is yes.
Now, it would've probably helped if the developers explicitly stated this: "We've fixed the busted test environment and also made some runs on test, and we believe the changes are still best for the game. They work well in the non-busted code, so we're keeping them." Sounds reasonable to me.
Are the changes overkill in the live game? Maybe. The developers don't seem to agree.
Did the developers say, "Whups, these are busted and will bend several scrappers over a hard wooden chair. Hrm. Well... too bad, so sad, push 'em live anyhow." I very much doubt it.
At the most cynical, I think Hanlon's Razor might apply here.
[ QUOTE ]
So you dont think for example phase shift was put on a timer as people could stealth through entire series of missons with not thought or or risk.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope. Can do it with Invis and Stealth too. And they listed badge hunting first in the list. 
I think Phase Shift was changed as it was primarily for PvP with PvE excuses added on. It would have to require much more work for a PvP only change and I would not decry them that, but trying to paint the Phase Shift hack as a PvE issue is beyond my ability to believe. If there were no PvP I do not believe Phase Shift would have been changed as it was.
total kick to the gut
This is like having Ra's Al Ghul show up at your birthday party.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So you dont think for example phase shift was put on a timer as people could stealth through entire series of missons with not thought or or risk.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope. Can do it with Invis and Stealth too. And they listed badge hunting first in the list.
I think Phase Shift was changed as it was primarily for PvP with PvE excuses added on. It would have to require much more work for a PvP only change and I would not decry them that, but trying to paint the Phase Shift hack as a PvE issue is beyond my ability to believe. If there were no PvP I do not believe Phase Shift would have been changed as it was.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think your right
You know taking this from a completely comic book type of view, well since thats what this game is based on. How many times in comics do super hero powers get nerfed. Not that many. More times then not comics just come up with bigger and badder bad guys. Thats my point in making it more challaging. Dont nerf us make the bad guys bigger and Badder!
It's just impossible for me to believe the changes to Invulnerability had nothing to do with PvP. It's a set that BEGS for resistances--almost all the powers are devoted to it--and you give us the DEF from a highly dubious power (Invincibility).
Def was a big problem in PvP. You said it yourself: players prefer hitting 75% of th etime. So it's all about players being frustrated "constantly missing" in PvP.
I'm not saying it's a conspiracy--because I think that suggests a degree of secrecy that's just uncessary. The company can have a policy and not advertise it. That's not a conspiracy.
It's just not telling us the whole truth.
As time has past--and with CoV being what it is--my bitterness with the game is getting much stronger. And I think PvP is a major cause of all the problems that have come about.
Do you remember what it was like when they made the bad guys tougher? It was as if millions of voices cried out all at once.....
.....and kept crying until they rolled the changes back.
[ QUOTE ]
Did the developers say, "Whups, these are busted and will bend several scrappers over a hard wooden chair. Hrm. Well... too bad, so sad, push 'em live anyhow." I very much doubt it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I doubt it too. But it gets old asking and asking and asking and having the answer be completely unquantified salve like "X was unparallelled" or "Y was boring". Or even worse, "Z could take on 20 foes and win" when so could A through Y.
I don't speak for everyone, but when you look back at my posts, I am very interested in powerset and AT parity within role. For example you won't see me saying that Defenders need to kill foes as fast as Blasters, but I will say they need to defend their team about as well as one another. Blasters and Scrappers both kill things, but in very different ways. So I'll go after a metric they can share, like XP/hour. Scrappers and Tankers are all built to slap things and take a slapping. Within their ATs they should all do that about as well in the majority of cases.
So I don't stand on Regen or Invuln alone and preach "woe unto them". I preach the brokenness I see in any AT/Powerset combo. I put the most time and analysis into the ones I play, but that doesn't mean I don't experience the problems with others by playing with them, or just plain being able to translate the analysis. Many of the problems for SR Scrappers translate directly to Force Field; I can see that without playing one.
I feel exceptionally strongly that I5 should have improved balance of the sort I'm talking about. Instead, it just juggled it. I can live with the global changes, but they weren't applied consistently. Instant Healing did not need to become a click-power to be I5 compliant. Invulnerability's non L/S resists did not need to be made 40% lower than direct I5 standards would suggest. Defense (as in the thing used by FF bubbles, Ice Tankers and SR Scrappers) was unduely gutted when they already were the least scalable and most nullified abilities in the game.
I reiterate. I would pay to have these issues fixed rather than half-[censored] band-aides applied. The game has real broken-ness in it that has nothing to do with boredom or god-mode. There are whole power lines in the game that will never, ever be able to perform as well as others unless some basic game mechanics change. Some two years after release I want to see that done with preference to what we got in I5. Because I hate to tell you, but I5 did not meet its goal. "Easy mode" is totally relative. If powerset X can take on 10 +2 foes and powerset Y can only take on 4 +1s, then powerset X is on easy mode. Powerset X will level faster, will be more popular with players in the know, and will be up for nerfing. But all the analysis I have seen tells me such nerfing will always be an endless cycle, because the powersets are broken in relative performance. The current mechanics dissallow them to scale equally with foe level.
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 ]
Did the developers say, "Whups, these are busted and will bend several scrappers over a hard wooden chair. Hrm. Well... too bad, so sad, push 'em live anyhow." I very much doubt it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I doubt it too. But it gets old asking and asking and asking and having the answer be completely unquantified salve like "X was unparallelled" or "Y was boring". Or even worse, "Z could take on 20 foes and win" when so could A through Y.
I don't speak for everyone, but when you look back at my posts, I am very interested in powerset and AT parity within role. For example you won't see me saying that Defenders need to kill foes as fast as Blasters, but I will say they need to defend their team about as well as one another. Blasters and Scrappers both kill things, but in very different ways. So I'll go after a metric they can share, like XP/hour. Scrappers and Tankers are all built to slap things and take a slapping. Within their ATs they should all do that about as well in the majority of cases.
So I don't stand on Regen or Invuln alone and preach "woe unto them". I preach the brokenness I see in any AT/Powerset combo. I put the most time and analysis into the ones I play, but that doesn't mean I don't experience the problems with others by playing with them, or just plain being able to translate the analysis. Many of the problems for SR Scrappers translate directly to Force Field; I can see that without playing one.
I feel exceptionally strongly that I5 should have improved balance of the sort I'm talking about. Instead, it just juggled it. I can live with the global changes, but they weren't applied consistently. Instant Healing did not need to become a click-power to be I5 compliant. Invulnerability's non L/S resists did not need to be made 40% lower than direct I5 standards would suggest. Defense (as in the thing used by FF bubbles, Ice Tankers and SR Scrappers) was unduely gutted when they already were the least scalable and most nullified abilities in the game.
I reiterate. I would pay to have these issues fixed rather than half-[censored] band-aides applied. The game has real broken-ness in it that has nothing to do with boredom or god-mode. There are whole power lines in the game that will never, ever be able to perform as well as others unless some basic game mechanics change. Some two years after release I want to see that done with preference to what we got in I5. Because I hate to tell you, but I5 did not meet its goal. "Easy mode" is totally relative. If powerset X can take on 10 +2 foes and powerset Y can only take on 4 +1s, then powerset X is on easy mode. Powerset X will level faster, will be more popular with players in the know, and will be up for nerfing. But all the analysis I have seen tells me such nerfing will always be an endless cycle, because the powersets are broken in relative performance. The current mechanics dissallow them to scale equally with foe level.
[/ QUOTE ]
First off nice post.
That said I dont get into the game mechanics that much as I just like to play the game. So I look at this mostly from a comic book point of view. I actually believe some toons should be stronger then others. Super heros in comics are not by any strech of the means equal at all. They all however have a nitch or something that makes them worth while.
But going back to my previous post, they are never nerfed in comics either.
No matter what Any dev says or has promised things such as PVP would never change PVE gameplay. Are dead wrong! PVE gameplay would never have been messed with like this if it wasnt for PVP. I like PVP its ok and I enter the Arena on occasion, But mostly Im a PVE player. Im tired of my toons getting crapped on for PVP! Alright lemme stop before I rant again 
[ 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 ]
Not to mention how easy Hibernate made it to kill AVs. I mean hold aggro on AVs. No wait, I mean click glowies with no ri... hmm.
Badg..! No.
What did Hibernate lasting more than 30 seconds enable you to do in PvE again? Endlessly exist in a state of no-risk, no-reward?
Somebody better do something about all those people standing around at the tram.
Please try my custom mission arcs!
Legacy of a Rogue (ID 459586, Entry for Dr. Aeon's Third Challenge)
Death for Dollars! (ID 1050)
Dr. Duplicate's Dastardly Dare (ID 1218)
Win the Past, Own the Future (ID 1429)
Don't take this as personal criticism or the beginning of a flame war, I just wanted to explain a couple of things:
[ QUOTE ]
Though, 40-50 isn't just Peregrine Island. There's also Shadow Shard. And Rikti Crash Site.
[/ QUOTE ]
I mentioned those when I said:
At level 50 there is one city zone, a hazard zone that nobody goes to, another hazard zone with the most horribly boring and laggy experience the entire game has to offer, and 4 connected, nearly identical hazard zones that have repetitive missions with no storylines, insanely repetitive TFs that require 8 people and blocks of 4-12 (!!) hours to complete, and to top it off the zones punish you for not taking flight or teleport.
You might also note that I didn't mention Perez Park, Boomtown, Faultline, Dark Astoria, or Crey's Folly for the 1-39 stuff, either. I was talking about meaningful content, not hazard zones or an endless supply of soulless glowie clicking or rescue missions.
[ QUOTE ]
And all the other dimensions you go to.
[/ QUOTE ]
Those are actually the missions you get in Peregrine, so they fall under Peregrine just like the Frostfire mission falls under The Hollows.
Please try my custom mission arcs!
Legacy of a Rogue (ID 459586, Entry for Dr. Aeon's Third Challenge)
Death for Dollars! (ID 1050)
Dr. Duplicate's Dastardly Dare (ID 1218)
Win the Past, Own the Future (ID 1429)
[ QUOTE ]
I dont get into the game mechanics that much as I just like to play the game
[/ QUOTE ]
Trust me, I'd much rather just play the game. I'm a big thinker though, and at some point, when contemplating a respec or what power to take next, I dive off into a spreadsheet or something. I start comparing what the numbers tell me to how the game "feels", and I start thinking about how the feel of different but similar Heroes compare.
I can tell you that for the longest time I thought my SR Scrapper "felt" fine. I argued with people about it here on the boards. If SR was so gimp, why did I enjoy mine so?
Then, altitis took hold, and I made an Invul Scrapper, and mine eyes were opened. And then I made a Regen, and they were opened some more. It wasn't that SR was unplayable (not usually, anyway), but that compared to the other sets it had a fraction of the relative potential in the 30+ game. Even Dark Armor, so long lamented as being awful, saw a vast improvement when it finally got stacking armors, and was right up there in durability with my Invuln. +2, +3 foes for lunch, breakfast and dinner. My SR? Not so much.
And I5 didn't fix it at all. I5 changed the pecking order from (IMO):
Regen == Invul > DA > SR
(Regen for the win vs. single big foes, Invul for the win vs. lots of moderate ones)
to
DA > Regen >= Invul > SR
[ QUOTE ]
I actually believe some toons should be stronger then others. Super heros in comics are not by any strech of the means equal at all. They all however have a nitch or something that makes them worth while.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand where you're coming from, but I think, in a game like this, that that's not fair to the players. No one would pick up the a game and expect that, except maybe based on AT. After all, the AT descriptions say that this or that AT needs a team, not the powersets within ATs. I played my SR to 30 before I shelved him (I'm too sentimental to delete my first MMO toon) because I got spoiled by all my other toons in comparison. I'm just not into the idea of playing a character who just generally can't achieve comparably to others in his "class".
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 ]
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 ]
What I take issue with (although I haven't kept up with the thread) is the fuzziness between "The developers are wrong in their assessment of the gameplay", "The developers are implementing a poor solution to a valid problem", and "the developers are lying." The first two I can accept wholeheartedly. As your example points out, they've been wrong. My opinion about the Phase Shift change and (to a lesser degree) movement power supression is that the changes are overkill for the PvE problems.
But lying? No. I don't accept that. I think what happens to a lot of people, myself included, is that we read statements by the developers, take away what we want to hear and ignore the caveats, and when those caveats kick in we turn around and state, "But you said...!"
I think this post by Positron is a perfect example. A search for Statesman's posts pre-I4 should turn up the "whenever possible" caveat. When supression came up there was some speculation that it was strictly a PvP issue, but posts by Statesman, FrostyBot, and Pilcrow -- the latter two going in and demonstrating the PvE problems with movement powers -- showed that there was a PvE problem. Now, whether supression is a satisfactory solution to the PvE problems...
As an aside, I'm going to quibble that Statesman ever called those who disliked the actual changes "conspiracy theorists." He did mention Conspiracy Theorists here, but in context I take that to mean "people who think the developers faked the Zapru-- er, test video. I also quibble that the revelation that the test environment was screwy didn't result in the developers rethinking particular nerfs. Sure, there's still been nerfs, but I suspect they weren't as severe as they were going to be had the playerbase not caught the problems with the developers' test environment.
[/ QUOTE ]
FYI, the nerfs to Regen on Test Server at that point in time DID NOT change due to the demorecord being found borked. The same nerfs that were already there went Live even though it was shown the Internal Test Environment was screwed up.
Virtue: multiple characters.
CoH/V: Woot! Maybe Fun is to be had once again.
Ack! RUN! Regen is glowing mean & green!
If it reduces you, it's a nerf.
If it buffs the mobs, it's challenge.
They are not the same.
[ QUOTE ]
Do you remember what it was like when they made the bad guys tougher? It was as if millions of voices cried out all at once.....
.....and kept crying until they rolled the changes back.
[/ QUOTE ]
That was bosses only and they NEVER explored the rest of the "buff the bad guys" options that were on the table with any of the players. They simply washed their hands of it the moment that idea had a SINGlE failure.
Try again.
Virtue: multiple characters.
CoH/V: Woot! Maybe Fun is to be had once again.
Ack! RUN! Regen is glowing mean & green!
If it reduces you, it's a nerf.
If it buffs the mobs, it's challenge.
They are not the same.
And.....they didn't exactly make the bad guys tougher. All they did was increase boss hitpoints and damage.
So those who formerly got two shotted were now one shotted while those who weren't simply took a few extra seconds to defeat them.
It was an all around bad idea. I would be hard pressed to even call it an idea, that's quite an insult to ideas.
I find it hard to belive these guys can make this entire game, but not come up with interesting ways to make the bad guys tougher. Of course they've been able to surprise me in the past with lack of imagination, I really shouldn't tempt fate here I guess.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I also quibble that the revelation that the test environment was screwy didn't result in the developers rethinking particular nerfs. Sure, there's still been nerfs, but I suspect they weren't as severe as they were going to be had the playerbase not caught the problems with the developers' test environment.
[/ QUOTE ]
FYI, the nerfs to Regen on Test Server at that point in time DID NOT change due to the demorecord being found borked. The same nerfs that were already there went Live even though it was shown the Internal Test Environment was screwed up.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just to reiterate: this is true. I'm hardly suggesting that the developers did not push the changes through. What I'm saying is that I suspect the changes that could have eventually gone live based on the busted test environment didn't happen. The changes went through because the developers thought they were appropriate for live.
The alternative is to suggest that the developers believed the nerfs were too harsh compared to the live, non-busted environment... and pushed them through regardless. I don't think they'd do that.
I admit it's a semi-subtle distinction. For the PvP issue, for example, you can say, "Despite Statesman's assurances, these changes to powers were because of PvP." I can say "The changes address both PvP and PvE problems, but the changes are overkill for fixing the PvE problems." The net result may be the same, but I think the difference is "you're lying" vs. "you've made a poor call for the PvE game."
NONE of which addresses my opinion about the specific changes or the level of communication we've had about them from the developers. I just believe they're far more likely mistaken or misguided than misleading.
[ QUOTE ]
And.....they didn't exactly make the bad guys tougher. All they did was increase boss hitpoints and damage.
So those who formerly got two shotted were now one shotted while those who weren't simply took a few extra seconds to defeat them.
It was an all around bad idea. I would be hard pressed to even call it an idea, that's quite an insult to ideas.
I find it hard to belive these guys can make this entire game, but not come up with interesting ways to make the bad guys tougher. Of course they've been able to surprise me in the past with lack of imagination, I really shouldn't tempt fate here I guess.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree there has to be a more creative way to make the Baddies better, Like I mentioned why can't they go get help or something...other games such as WOW, if a baddie is hurt he will run off and get friends. Not like here where they run off in hopes that u aggro a mob. I mean if u take a few pages from comics baddies are much more creative then they way the are portrayed here in the game.
[ QUOTE ]
I understand where you're coming from, but I think, in a game like this, that that's not fair to the players. No one would pick up the a game and expect that, except maybe based on AT. After all, the AT descriptions say that this or that AT needs a team, not the powersets within ATs. I played my SR to 30 before I shelved him (I'm too sentimental to delete my first MMO toon) because I got spoiled by all my other toons in comparison. I'm just not into the idea of playing a character who just generally can't achieve comparably to others in his "class".
[/ QUOTE ]
I do believe that Ever toon should be able to Solo if the player so chooses. I know I solo alot and I hate feeling that I Must team to advance my toon at all (Good example is my fire troller he was horrid to level to 32) However I dont believe all toons are ever gonna be equal nor should they be. But I think thats where PVP hurt this game because people dont like getting the snot kicked out of them by a different type of toon.
[ QUOTE ]
I do believe that Ever toon should be able to Solo if the player so chooses. I know I solo alot and I hate feeling that I Must team to advance my toon at all (Good example is my fire troller he was horrid to level to 32) However I dont believe all toons are ever gonna be equal nor should they be. But I think thats where PVP hurt this game because people dont like getting the snot kicked out of them by a different type of toon.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just to be clear, I'm not saying that all ATs need to kick equal [censored] in combat. There are basically defense ATs and offense ATs, and I have no problem with them performing differently in battle, or being more or less able to solo along those distinctions.
I do have a problem with wide variations of effectiveness within an AT, and the powersets are rife with those. Examples that come to mind: Defense vs the other armors/buffs and attack sets like Tanker/Mace vs something like Energy Melee. There are others.
Finally, I do think variations are allowed as long as they are made up in some way. While I think Rad Emission and Dark Miasma are great sets, I don't think they can really pump up their team as well as Empathy. On the flip side, they solo way, way better, and where empathy buffs and heals, RE debuffs and buffs and DM debuffs, controls and heals. They're good at different things, and that's OK.
But it's not like an SR Scrapper is more team-oriented somehow (if anything, Invul and DA have this distinction). Dark Miasma and Rad Emission are sets in an AT that says it will probably need a team, but they can break the mold and solo. What's SR's deal? Or Ice's? What does Mace do better to make it equitable for it to have mediocre damage and low stun chance?
Those things are the things I hate to see left unaddressed with I5.
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 ]
I do have a problem with wide variations of effectiveness within an AT, and the powersets are rife with those. Examples that come to mind: Defense vs the other armors/buffs and attack sets like Tanker/Mace vs something like Energy Melee. There are others.
Those things are the things I hate to see left unaddressed with I5.
[/ QUOTE ]
I Do agree that some powersets need to be seriously looked at there are alot things they could change. But I would rather see powers pumped up then everyone else brought down by the nerf bat. I think just slashing powers in the name of equality or some thing near it, is just short sighted vision by the Devs.
Agreed for the vast majority of cases.
For the record, I think the idea behind the changes in I5 was totally workable. Nerfing everyone at once (mostly) to bring down the power level of all characters is not a flawed approach. IMO, not a step in a direction that improved the game, but it's not inherently unworkable. But (again IMO) the implemention was lacking. It wasn't an even scaling for everyone (or even one that brought weak sets up relative to strong ones), plus we got oddities like Regen/IH.
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 ]
Do you remember what it was like when they made the bad guys tougher? It was as if millions of voices cried out all at once.....
.....and kept crying until they rolled the changes back.
[/ QUOTE ]
He wasnt talking about something silly like the old boss changes where they upped their damage and HP (which screwed over lower damage ATs). Thats the lazy way to make the game "harder." Which it isnt really, just makes the math different. No more thought or tactics were required. My Dark Defender, for example, just had to burn one or two more Catch a Breaths to deal with the harder bosses. It wasnt any more challenging though, just a bigger time sink.
I believe he was talking about doing something to make the enemies smarter, to improve mob AI, to create different classes of mobs that present new and different challenges to the players that require more thinking. Those are all a little harder to do I'm sure, which is probably why we havent seen it. Though I'm not sure how hard it would really be to make Defender style mobs (like Crey medics) actually spend their time buffing/debuffing and healing their fellow mobs instead of running in to brawl the heroes.
And Statesman, just shut up about whats fun and whats boring until you post your complete vision of what is and what is not fun. You come off as a pompous twit every time you mention those two words in a post.
I'll believe you actually have data gathered from your customers on what they enjoy about this game when I hear of many people receiving surveys like the one NCSoft asked me to fill in about customer service from the GMs once. I've been subscribed since launch, and I have yet to see any evidence of any effort on Cryptic's part to do market research among their customer base. Sure, these forums are here, but from what I've heard you dont put very much weight into anything that gets written here.
How hard would it be to put together a websurvey and randomly email a few thousand subscribers every few months to find out what your customers actually like about your game? NCSoft already seems to have the technology set up to do it. Give them a call.
You dont seem to have put in the effort to figure out what your customers think is fun. Dont presume to speak to us about what is fun or boring until you do.
Heroes
Dysmal
Lumynous
Sam Steele
Pluck
Wile
Slagheap
Pressure Wave
Rhiannon Bel
Verified
Stellaric
Syd Mallorn
Villains
Jotunheim Skald
Saer Maen
Jen Corbae
Illuminance
Venator Arawn
Taiga Dryad
Tarranos
[ QUOTE ]
I believe he was talking about doing something to make the enemies smarter, to improve mob AI, to create different classes of mobs that present new and different challenges to the players that require more thinking. Those are all a little harder to do I'm sure, which is probably why we havent seen it. Though I'm not sure how hard it would really be to make Defender style mobs (like Crey medics) actually spend their time buffing/debuffing and healing their fellow mobs instead of running in to brawl the heroes.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thats Exactly what I meant. Dont get me wrong some of the Baddie AI isnt bad in this game, but alot of Improvement can be made to them.
Try Fighting the Cabal - very different AI there.
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
OSNAP.