Discussion: Changes to Task/Strike Force Missions
By
Acid_Reign,
Posted on: 2008-02-14 15:00 in News, Events and Announcement Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This was to address CAP RUNS.
[/ QUOTE ]
You believe they changed every single TF and SF in the game just to address Cap runs?
[/ QUOTE ]
Lulz forum stalkers.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's not like they nerfed all controllers to address issues with Fire/Kin controllers.
Oh wait, they did that.
"...freedom isn't a commodity to compromise." -- Captain America, New Avengers #21
Guide to Base Teleporters
[ QUOTE ]
Lulz forum stalkers.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was on this thread before you were, dear. Now kindly answer the question. Do you honestly think they changed the way all TFs and SFs work just in order to mess with one SF?
I do not believe for one minute that they "never intended" to stealth this in. This is a pretty big change and I find it hard to believe that it just got "lost" amongst the other stuff.
Sorry Devs....thats a lie.
@Mental Maden @Maden Mental
"....you are now tackle free for life."-ShoNuff
1) Why did it take until today for a post about this to be made?
2) How can inconsistencies with what is described and what people are experiencing be explained? For example, people are reporting that many of the TF spawns have two bosses even for 4-man teams. In a standard map, two-boss spawns are limited to 8-man teams.
3) Changes of this nature are inappropriate to fall under your "we don't talk about exploits" rule. This should have been in the test server patch notes. While it does address something you consider an exploit, it does so in a way that clearly impacts ordinary players (permanent loss of teammates on TFs is very common). There was a patch note mentioning that snake eggs weren't worth XP any more. This change was more deserving of mention.
4) If point 3 above is due only to "misplaced" patch notes, whatever you (collectively) are doing to generate patch notes blows. It is attrocious! Worse, this clearly couldn't have gotten any focused testing because people don't normally run TFs on the test server. As a result not only did it not get any "air time" it didn't get any testing by the playerbase - something you guys have made a point of using to improve the quality of your releases. How this could not only missed as a patch note but no one internally realized it hadn't been player tested completely escapes me.
The NCNC team has done a lot to improve my faith in them based on what I consider improvements in past processes and final product. However I consider the handling of this change a real backslide to old (poor) quality.
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 ]
(Honestly) Not to be rude...but...
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks in advance for your understanding and for your continued support.
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't thank in advance for that which will never be there...
[/ QUOTE ]
The same thought runs through my head every time he posts one of these stupid things. Support? Please
It wouldn't be so bad if I wasn't required to do all six long and boring TF's to get an accolade I need.
[ QUOTE ]
We feel that the group size requirements are certainly not onerous and that the need for grouping is a good dynamic in a social environment like City of Heroes.
[/ QUOTE ]
It certainly is onerous on those 8 person minimum, marathon Shadow Shard TFs. I don't think I've ever managed to finish one of those with more than half the members lasting until the end.
Gothika (Grav/Kin) Marionette (Ill/Rad) Terra Firma (Earth/Storm) Alana Dale (Arch/Nrg)
Iceblink (Ice/Dark) Fantasia (Mind/Fire) Shadow Minx (Claws/Nin)
--Virtue
On principle, I don't have a problem with the change, but it does create an issue.
Sometimes, for reasons beyond anyone's control, a TF team will lose a key member, or even several key members (sometimes it's real-life issues, sometimes it's internet connection wonkiness, etc).
If this happens at a bad time (like just before the final AV at the end of the last mission), the TF may very well be impossible to complete.
I would suggest that if a team's membership falls below the "minimum" for the TF because a player quit the TF (for any reason), the team leader *should* be able to add enough new team members to bring it back up to the TF minimum.
<QR>
So... to prevent people from doing RMT's, you're going to make it harder for players to get their coveted recipes?
I don't see how 100+ million infamy for a LotG Recharge will discourage paying cash to farmers.
[ QUOTE ]
Solo farming has just become SO much easier! Thank you!
EDIT: And sure it was "left out of the patch notes" earlier today you posted it was a bug. You guys at NCsoft sure are disorganized.
[/ QUOTE ]
They find time for this but cant clean up the mess that is older tf's..And after the discussion about stealth nerfs the last couple of days, they suddenly discover yet another nerf they "forgot"?
edit: maybe they can fix tf's to actually spawn at the teams level now. Instead of just setting them at max level and not giving a damn about it.
Lots of 50's yada yada. still finding fun things to do.
Cthulhu loves you, better start running
I�! I�! Gg�gorsch�a�bha egurtsa�ar�ug d� Dalhor! Cthluhu fthagn! Cthluhu fthagn!
You are in a maze of twisty little passages
Your desire to to prevent farming and /or maintain TF/SFs as purely group expierences are noted.
Of course I shall never get to see the content anymore, I live in Australia and my playing times don't concur with the majority of subscribers and have demands upon even that time which means the duration, organization and inconvenience to other players forbids me from taking on such things.
Thanks for taking TFs/SFs away from people. Thats the only thanks you will get from me.
I am not going to run off threaten to remove my account or carry on like an enraged fool, I just would like to stress that this change is actually rather cruel and hurts the casual player most. Your intention to hurt the farmer or whomever the change was targetted has exploded and hurt many many others.
Current Hero: Memoriam
Current Villian:Matty the Burn
Global Chat: Azazel005
[ QUOTE ]
"TFs will be farmed as the farmers want them to be farmed"
[/ QUOTE ]
Fixed.
The effect of this change on me, as a non-farmer: Before, if I screwed up my time management and I had to quit a TF early, all I had to do was quit between missions and all was okay. Now, I've buggered the team if I do so. In fact, it's so bad, it's borderline griefable. Wanna hose the TF? Just hit the quit button. Griefer or Leeroy on your team? Kick them at your own peril.
Worse, it kills 3-man Positron dead. No player is going to join a Positron without at least 6 or so, just to ensure against droppers. I'm sure glad I've got Positron's badge already on most of my heroes, because I'm not likely to ever do it again.
Roll this puppy back.
[ QUOTE ]
One of the many aims of this most recent update was to address exploitive behavior that could be used for influence/infamy farming. This is especially relevant when considering recent problems with unwanted real money trade (RMT) solicitations in game. Also included in the most recent update is the change to make it harder for RMT spammers to use the in game mail system for such advertisements. We will continue to make other changes as necessary to address the issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
well at least there will no longer be as many annoying tells about joining a team for a few minutes to help spawn bigger mobs.. you just provided them a way to do it on thier own... i can not believe NCSoft really sees this as a fix to prevent farming
[ QUOTE ]
...whatever you (collectively) are doing to generate patch notes blows. It is attrocious! Worse, this clearly couldn't have gotten any focused testing because people don't normally run TFs on the test server. As a result not only did it not get any "air time" it didn't get any testing by the playerbase - something you guys have made a point of using to improve the quality of your releases. How this could not only missed as a patch note but no one internally realized it hadn't been player tested completely escapes me.
The NCNC team has done a lot to improve my faith in them based on what I consider improvements in past processes and final product. However I consider the handling of this change a real backslide to old (poor) quality.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. The month of Febuary seems a giant step back for quality in Co*. Hopefully things will go return to their normally excellent standard next month.
"Mastermind Pets operate...differently, and aren't as easily fixed. Especially the Bruiser. I want to take him out behind the woodshed and pull an "old yeller" on him at times." - Castle
[ QUOTE ]
1) Why did it take until today for a post about this to be made?
2) How can inconsistencies with what is described and what people are experiencing be explained? For example, people are reporting that many of the TF spawns have two bosses even for 4-man teams. In a standard map, two-boss spawns are limited to 8-man teams.
3) Changes of this nature are inappropriate to fall under your "we don't talk about exploits" rule. This should have been in the test server patch notes. While it does address something you consider an exploit, it does so in a way that clearly impacts ordinary players (permanent loss of teammates on TFs is very common). There was a patch note mentioning that snake eggs weren't worth XP any more. This change was more deserving of mention.
4) If point 3 above is due only to "misplaced" patch notes, whatever you (collectively) are doing to generate patch notes blows. It is attrocious! Worse, this clearly couldn't have gotten any focused testing because people don't normally run TFs on the test server. As a result not only did it not get any "air time" it didn't get any testing by the playerbase - something you guys have made a point of using to improve the quality of your releases. How this could not only missed as a patch note but no one internally realized it hadn't been player tested completely escapes me.
The NCNC team has done a lot to improve my faith in them based on what I consider improvements in past processes and final product. However I consider the handling of this change a real backslide to old (poor) quality.
[/ QUOTE ]
Quote worthy...
As others mentioned TF/SF really need to be given a once over now.
1. Some are waaaay to long.
2. Some require way to many people to start.
3. Some just are not fun.
I understand that these are suppose to be "hardkore" content, all I can say to that is "Com'ooonnn...come'onnn..."
Also, I saw LH's "it's a bug" post. It happened, not minutes later LH deleted his post. I almost want to kill myself for agreeing with P_P, but her lastest thread on spreading to thin...may be correct..
*gun to mouth*
*boom*
[ QUOTE ]
One of the many aims of this most recent update was to address exploitive behavior that could be used for influence/infamy farming.
[/ QUOTE ]
So is this change related to what appears to be a reduction in the bonus inf you get while exemplared?
Just curious.
My postings to this forum are not to be used as data in any research study without my express written consent.
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I saw LH's "it's a bug" post. It happened, not minutes later LH deleted his post.
[/ QUOTE ]
I had forgotten about that post. Yeah, something is really messed up right now. Even Lighthouse didn't know about this "fix"
"Mastermind Pets operate...differently, and aren't as easily fixed. Especially the Bruiser. I want to take him out behind the woodshed and pull an "old yeller" on him at times." - Castle
[ QUOTE ]
As others mentioned TF/SF really need to be given a once over now.
1. Some are waaaay to long.
2. Some require way to many people to start.
3. Some just are not fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
example of lengthy SF: Lady Grey Task Force. A mild trim to that SF wouldn't hurt.
SF that requires to many to start: LGTF and RSF. I have complete both with less then 8 due to drop outs, including 2 seperate MoRSF runs with less then 8. Could the start up minimum become six instead for both these?
Fun factor: they are all are fun for me, some more then others of course.
[ QUOTE ]
1. Some are waaaay to long.
2. Some require way to many people to start.
3. Some just are not fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
And I know we can all name that one very special hero side TF that manages to hit all three. 
Can't complain about the minimum spawns, it's exactly what I suggested many moons ago on a thread about this exact issue. Now if they'd just take one of my other suggestions and reform the Shard TFs...
Skip
My Char. List and Market Transactions
HeroStats Developer
Legion of Valor
Iron Eagles
LH is just the messenger. It's not surprising he thought the fix may have been a bug, since the Ouroboros TF-style missions *were* bugged with huge spawns. The devs never communicated the TF changes to the players or to him, it seems.
A question and some comments...
Some were reporting that if people were offline but not quit, the spawns would be based on people in the TF, offline or online. For example, a TF with minimum size of six starts with eight people, two people disconnect and don't come back. From what you are saying the spawn sizes should be based on six people, but some were saying that spawn sizes were the size you'd expect with eight people. Was this bad analysis of the situation, or is there an additional part to drop.
Second, I'm sorry, but after all this time, really key changes not making it into patch notes, it's just not acceptable anymore. This isn't "Oh, we found a problem with the damage done by a specific power and fixed it", this is a significant change to a key mechanic. It's not something that one programmer working on something failed to document, it's a change in the rules.
I'll take your word that it was left out, but that's not acceptable. It should have been in the patch notes when it hit test. Why? Because the discussion should have happened before it was pushed live.
Here's why, at least as this is done, it's a lousy change. Heroside, the biggest problem with TFs is that so many of them are an annoying soul-deadening grind. Point of Balance finally got all the shard TFs, and while they had moments of interest, it was lost in hours of tedium. They COULD be interesting TFs if someone spent a few hours editing them, removing the pointless "go do this a number of times for no reason other than I said so, oh and go back to Atlas Park and then back deep into the shard because clearly the only communications system available in Paragon city is carrier pigeon and you look like a good pigeon" parts. The first is the worst, and while it can easily be done by 4 people (pre patch) it has a minimum number of 8 people.
Because the shard TFs take so long and are less accessible to those who don't have flight, it can be hard to get a full team. Often, people have to resort to "please, someone join just so we can start this". But even if you have eight people who want to do it, real life interferes, and people leave. I could be mistaken, but I don't think any of the shard TFs ended with everyone they started with. But with this change, we'd be dealing with 8-person spawns full time.
In addition to the shard, most of the Freedom Phalanx TFs are overly long, repetitive. The problems with Positron TF are well documented elsewhere. And most can be done with teams smaller than the stated minimums, if it's a good team. Manticore certainly doesn't need 7 people.
What this change means is that if players have spent hours on a TF have some others leave (for real life emergencies, for computer problems, or just "this is boring I'm gone") may see all that time go down the drain if they can't handle the large group sizes.
I understand there's an exploit with the Cap Au Diable TF. There was a similar exploit with the redside respec for vines, and that was solved by having more vines grow as people appear. That seems like a good solution longterm, but it presumably isn't a fast fix.
There are two ways to make this change less painful to people who are playing by the rules. PLEASE consider one or both.
The first, heroside, is reduce the minimum team side for TFs. With the possible exception of the STF or LRSF, none should require more than six, and four should be the norm. Change the text, if necessary, to say that a larger number is suggested, but bring the minimums to what a good team should do.
The other solution is, instead of spawning for minimum TF requirement, make it minimum - 2, or make it 4 or minimum (whichever is smaller). Yes, it provides some opportunity for soft loading still, but it's a compromise between reducing the soft loading and keeping TFs (and SFs) as fun as possible.
But given the problems with TFs heroside and the paucity of SFs redside...making them less fun and more unforgiving seems like a really bad idea.
My arcs are constantly shifting, just search for GadgetDon for the latest.
The world beware! I've started a blog
GadgetMania Under Attack: The Digg Lockout
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We know that finding out about this change after the patch is already live is not the ideal way to go about it. It was never our intent to hide or stealth this change out, it was simply lost in the volume of other changes spanning many months.
[/ QUOTE ]
This part I am not buying even for a second. It has happened way too much since the begining of the game, it even happens after Jack left the game. Lighthouse this is a pretty huge change that we should have known about in the patch notes, there is absolutely no excuse that something this big gets missed in the patch notes. I can understand not posting a patch note due to the exploits like the Ouroboros powerlevel exploit but this isnt even on that level and should not have been missed period. This has been a constant thing with us the players having to figure it out whether it was a bug or "Working As Intended". You guys need to do better because this is inexcuseable due to the size of the change.
[/ QUOTE ]
So...you're going to write your congressman?
SadysCHICK ALL the Badges! (I can get. 1396)
Full image by David Nakayama
Arc ID 1435: Performing without Annette
Arc ID 7206: Sadystic Tendencies
Arc ID 3864: The Chronicles of (In)FERNIA!
Are you serious? It took you this long to reply?
How did you miss a change this big? How, when you found out about it, could you think it was a good idea to wait so very long to tell us? And why do you think we would possibly buy the idea that it was for RMTers?
I'm just apalled at the way this whole patch, and this change in particular, was handled. In between forgetting to add the nerfs in the live notes, having a lot of erroneous notes that were about test to test changes only, this patch release was incredibly sloppy. You had this great amazing patch, and instead of board discussion being a celebration about the power changes and the real numbers, instead there's a lot of resentment because of poor communication. Are you guys going to look at how patch notes are handled?
I guess my main question is though, is this a change that's still up for discussion? A lot of people have valid concerns (Shadow Shard TFs are going to be near impossible), and I guess I'd like to know if you're going to be listening to us or if this is one of those things where the ship has sailed.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes all the most recent changes to the game have converted it to City of Farmers,
1) purple recipes tied to mob defeats = best way to get them = farm or PL
2) XP smoothing = reduced the number of drops per level = farm oro to get stuff.
3) XP smoothing = sweeping hazard zones are the best place to level (again, we've come full circle on this one) and while you are sweeping you get to farm.
Lotta really bad ideas here that all point to skipping content and merely farming as the "most efficient way to play the game"
[/ QUOTE ]
And still the most boring.
I'm going to love this change because it's going to give me what I want for once. I get to have cranked up spawns, not for farming, not for drops, but for the joy of the carnage.
All at my own pace with minimal harassment of other players.
Right on.
[/ QUOTE ]
You mean this didn't force you to "play with a team"? DOH!