How can we make this game more challenging?
By
aasjkydiu,
Posted on: 2009-07-01 13:23 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
An easy way to make this game challenging is to make the mobs' AI smarter, or in other words, everything artic1337 said.
The issue there is infringing on individual player abilities. Raising the Minimum bar can make the game unplayable for some or even a lot of people.
Better to raise the upper-most bar and let people achieve bigger and better things rather than ruin other people's gameplay.
-Rachel-
[ QUOTE ]
This is how mobs behaved at launch, and we got by.
[/ QUOTE ]
We aren't AT launch now. And the philosophy behind gameplay for this game has evolved since then. We had no difficulty levels, we had many missions and arcs which absolutely weren't soloable. We were essentially going based on Emmert's risk vs. reward ideas. Powers weren't balanced according to activation time and other factors like they are now, and several villain groups that we have today were completely absent from the game. Also...there was no ED or GDN.
[ QUOTE ]
This is how street mobs and bank mission mobs behave today, and we get by.
[/ QUOTE ]
Those mob spawns are also very spaced out and one spawn does NOT aggro the others.
[ QUOTE ]
If an AT/powerset can't solo a level appropriate spawn of 3 or 4 mobs then the devs need to put the new costume creation pipe down and give some attention to basic game play issues. Dealing with additional aggro from perceptive nearby mob is not an AT issue . . . that should be all on the player and his or her skill.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sure all ATs can solo level appropriate spawns right now. But you're talking about making an AT take an alpha from a spawn every single time...no matter how spaced out they are and having runners trip other spawns down on top of the player in addition to the spawn he/she chose to engage. Spawn placements and composition are random in missions...that includes objective spawns as well as regular spawns. How do you propose to stop a runner from bring the end spawn boss and/or AV back to the player/team if all mobs are alerted by runners?
Some ATs and powerset combos can handle several additional spawns...but there are several that flat out cannot because the focus of their AT/powers is team based.
My archery/dev blaster can handle more enemies in a way my AR/ice blaster cannot. That doesn't mean that either AR or ice needs additional buffs. You can't design a game that caters to a single perspective of 'challenge' because it forces people to create toons of all the same type. If everyone played scrappers, brutes or tanks only...then sure you could make mobs go crazy...that cannot and will not work here.
Now...that doesn't mean that other things can't be done to make gameplay more interesting...but changing mob perception to 'always swarm' won't bring much besides frustration to some players.
[ QUOTE ]
Sure all ATs can solo level appropriate spawns right now. But you're talking about making an AT take an alpha from a spawn every single time...no matter how spaced out they are and having runners trip other spawns down on top of the player in addition to the spawn he/she chose to engage. Spawn placements and composition are random in missions...that includes objective spawns as well as regular spawns.
[/ QUOTE ]
All ATs are perfectly able to handle the "alpha" from a level approriate spawn of 3 or 4 mobs. We all know the melee classes can handle it, but that discussion is not needed since running into the spawn removes the retardation of mobs AI perception rules. But, for instance, a Controller can hold one, immob the first one to start charging, go to work on the 3rd and 4th with other powers and then start using holds and immobs again. If a controller can't EVER deal with a 3 or 4 level appropriate mob spawn then that AT needs to be looked at. The worst solution is making it so mob AI is so passive they will not initiate an encounter with a close by character.
[ QUOTE ]
How do you propose to stop a runner from bring the end spawn boss and/or AV back to the player/team if all mobs are alerted by runners?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's my point. What's the point of Runaway code if there is no detrimental affect to just ignoring the runner. If runners actually brought back help then it would be up to the player to deal with that tactical situation, and feel cool for doing so successfully. I'm not saying "Put bring-back-help-behaviour in the game!" I'm asking, "Why is there even Runaway behaviour in the first place? What's the freaking point?"
[ QUOTE ]
To achieve what you'd like to see done with perception and still keep the game fair for all ATs...you would essentially have to redesign it from the ground up. The differences between ATs...hitpoints, mez protection etc...exist because they aren't all supposed to do the same things.
[/ QUOTE ]
All ATs should be able to do 1 thing as well as any other AT . . . solo their contact missions. Dumbing down mobs to achieve this is just about the most pathetic way to go about it.
Mobs composed entirely of Statesman.
[ QUOTE ]
But, for instance, a Controller can hold one, immob the first one to start charging, go to work on the 3rd and 4th with other powers and then start using holds and immobs again.
[/ QUOTE ]
Holds can miss, immobs can miss. Sometimes both will miss. Throughout all this you may have forgotten that this is an RPG with random numbers behind what's seen on the screen as a straightforward use of a power. You won't hold everytime, you won't immob everytime. And the margin for error for a controller or dominator(a bit less so now) missing a hold on a critical mob is a lot tighter than a scrapper, tank or brute missing a swing.
There are mobs that resist holds, stuns, sleep etc. Mobs that have those things themselves. There is no way that having an entire spawn ALWAYS aggro straight on you is always desirable for every AT. Blasters have a similar fine line to walk. 2 or three misses can mean that a tank freak gets in his 450dmg attack and you go down.
[ QUOTE ]
If a controller can't EVER deal with a 3 or 4 level appropriate mob spawn then that AT needs to be looked at. The worst solution is making it so mob AI is so passive they will not initiate an encounter with a close by character.
[/ QUOTE ]
That does not ALWAYS happen...some mobs have greater perception than others. Like Fortunatas for instance. But they are NOT in every spawn...nor should they be.
At the end of the day...its not a shooter you're playing. It's a freaking RPG with randomly placed and randomly composed groups of enemies sometimes in random maps.
There are plenty of great games out there with just the type of action you're looking for.
I have always lobbied for deeper gameplay elements in this game...but mob perception isn't at the heart of what really needs to change. Making the game slower for some ATs and powersets to play through just so you can get your 'challenge' fix isn't to the benefit of the whole.
[ QUOTE ]
There are mobs that resist holds, stuns, sleep etc. Mobs that have those things themselves. There is no way that having an entire spawn ALWAYS aggro straight on you is always desirable for every AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hold on. sorry if I wasn't clear. I have no problem with an entire spawn not ALWAYS aggroing.
But . . . This = not right.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are mobs that resist holds, stuns, sleep etc. Mobs that have those things themselves. There is no way that having an entire spawn ALWAYS aggro straight on you is always desirable for every AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hold on. sorry if I wasn't clear. I have no problem with an entire spawn not ALWAYS aggroing.
But . . . This = not right.
[/ QUOTE ]
*blink* Even for Vaz mobs, thats a hard line of reasoning to argue with.
Yeah, and especially 'cause they're docs . . . they don't have the uber passive zombie AI . . . they're just like all other mobs.
[ QUOTE ]
Hold on. sorry if I wasn't clear. I have no problem with an entire spawn not ALWAYS aggroing.
But . . . This = not right.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll concede that THAT...is not right.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hold on. sorry if I wasn't clear. I have no problem with an entire spawn not ALWAYS aggroing.
But . . . This = not right.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll concede that THAT...is not right.
[/ QUOTE ]
And THAT is pretty typical of mob aggressiveness.
So what can we conclude from this . . .
Step 1: stop hanging around with farmers.
Farmers minimize challenge and maximize reward. That balancing act can be a fun game in itself, but it's not what you're after.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hold on. sorry if I wasn't clear. I have no problem with an entire spawn not ALWAYS aggroing.
But . . . This = not right.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll concede that THAT...is not right.
[/ QUOTE ]
And THAT is pretty typical of mob aggressiveness.
So what can we conclude from this . . .
[/ QUOTE ]
We can conclude nothing since I do not rcognize this statement:
[ QUOTE ]
And THAT is pretty typical of mob aggressiveness.
[/ QUOTE ]
With its single example of proof as fact.
It's a great example of Vahz aggression.
It's not a good example of any other kind.
Merely making mobs notice you more or quicker, isn't my idea of how I'd like this game to be "improved".
If I'm playing on Heroic, I expect groupings of 3 or maybe 4 defeatable enemies to be around a mission map. If ones halfway across a large room noticed me earlier, that would increase my targets perhaps twice or three times - defeating the whole purpose of having that particular level of difficulty set.
As an option for SOME people, I absolutely think there should be more aggressive behavior from some mobs. But I don't in any way think that the basic "version" of the game should be changed to suit a small number of forum-goers who think it's "too easy".
Please read my FEAR/Portal/HalfLife Fan Fiction!
Repurposed
Vahz docs behave the same as any other villian group. It's just the zombies that are even more retarded than the average mob.
[ QUOTE ]
It's a great example of Vahz aggression.
It's not a good example of any other kind.
[/ QUOTE ]
My point was that it's not even a good example of that since I can supply endless screenshots of that not happening. This may very well have been a "one-off" bug that was saved precisely because it was so unusual, but is now being trotted out as universal proof that mobs are insufficiently aggressive.
Mmm, more challenging by whose terms?
Frankly from a devs perspective...
During TFs, incapacitate all forms of cheat travels such as Ouroborus portals, base portals, mission portals, and what not.
Carefully plan each zone engagement to maximize zone travel through operations, thus make sure players have to run the entire length of Steel Canyon or Skyline or Independance Port. Also make sure mission door is as far as possible from zone entrance.
Also make sure that each mission forces players to go to the most remote zones, such as far end boom town, perez park, Dark Astoria, Crey and Eden. Never have the mission at easy to get to zones.
Thus send the turkeys, err players, to start at Galaxy, from there send them to Dark Astoria. This way they have to run to get on train to SC, then run entire SC to get to high level zone train. Then, muahahahaha, they have to go to Talos, then travel thru the width of talos to DA entrance, and finally go the very far corner in DA to enter mission muahahahaha. When they finish, they need to go to Peres Park, muahahahahahaha, after that they need to go to Crey's Folley, oh my this is rich, muahahahahah; now return them to Perez Park, in preparation for their trip to Eden, muahahahah.
Oh wait, the devs are allready doing this, well they need to be more consistent.
Next challenge increase, bosses are at farthest end in annoying rooms such as cake, and pool rooms. Muahahaha
Oh wait, they are already doing this, well they need to be more consistent.
So after having spurious maximized brainless travel, and annoying end rooms, now work on the bosses:
Nosferatu types are great, they heal themselves at the player expense, thus take much longer to kill; of course the ultimate boss is Reichman, whose true power is to bore players into giving up! Now that is the ultimate challenge! So add to all missions the defeit Reichman boss, you can change his name, the players are too dumb to notice anyway "muahahahah", nor does it matter if they notice, muahahahahahah.
How is that for dev perspective challenge?
Muhahahahaha
Take away the ability to call contacts, this way more travel can be assigned to teams. Also move contacts to farthest locations of maps from zone entry points. Take Gordon at Bricks, good example of this practice! Muahahaha, this is just evil, muahahahah
Oh wait, devs are allready doing this, well they need to be more consistent!
Stormy
Warning" Beware of what you may be asking for
"Time sink" =/= challenge. Not really a valid rant for THIS subject matter, though I understand your point.
I just think that it IS time for several more levels of refinement on the difficulty slider. Perhaps even a global "task force" challenge rating - change it so ALL your missions can be timed, zero deaths, enemies buffed, etc. Obviously, make this similar to the way we can pay for a change if it's way out of our league.
This alters the individual challenge level *without* changing the basic game for everyone.
Please read my FEAR/Portal/HalfLife Fan Fiction!
Repurposed
Giggles
My previous post was mere sarcasm, but I do have the feel that to devs time sink is the same as challenge to them; perhaps because it does not take a lot of imagination or that aweful 4 letter word "work".
But if I was to add challenge, I would like to see challenge be more AT specific. In the past, increase of challenge has consited in having more SPAM status effects which frankly has a much greater impact on support classes than melee. I would like to see challenge increases which impacts the melee classes more, with out socking it to the support classes. This way the melee can expeience the added challenge with out having the challenge be several times greater on the Support. How this can be accomplished I am not sure.
Perhaps and really would be nice if Debuffs have MAG effect and Ats would have Debuff Mag Resistances to them. But instead of handing over the MAG invulnerability to the melees in a silver plater; reverse the situation. Give the support classes near invulnerability to debuff effects and give none to the melee classes, A reflection of what is done with the status effects today. With this addition, then go over the mobs and half of the mobs who have status effects, have these replaced with debuffs instead. Thus the Status effect and Debuff situation is evenly spread from group to group, and thus evenly challenge different ATs. I still think Status Effects are much more deadly in ultimate effect than debuffs, but at least you are giving melee ATs a semblance of the challenge non melees are already experiencing.
Hugs
Stormy
Take out all your purple IO's and use training enhancements. Bam, games hard and you didn't have to make it unfun for those of us who find it "just right".
Some of the stuff you said is worth considering.
I actually once posted that perhaps there need to be mobs that are specifically anti melee and use powers that hinder them more.
The tech is there to have those awful Quantums and Voids spawn in every Kheldian mission. Why not use that same tech to give enemy groups the chance to spawn mobs that specifically aggro on tanks/brutes/scrappers/stalkers with powers that effect those ATs specifically?
In a sense...have the game react more intelligently to the consistency of a team, rather than just random globs of mobs that could be anything.
I said to someone the other day...even with the dom buff, you still need to play carefully. If I miss 2 holds or a hold and an immobilize in a row, I'm going to HURT. A scrapper or brute can miss as many swings as they like. They aren't going to get held, stunned, slept, knocked back(usually) and then gang [censored] in a few seconds if they are off their game a bit or have an unlucky streak.
[ QUOTE ]
What you want is more *variety* in missions, and more complicated story telling, .
[/ QUOTE ]
This would be incredibly great
I have to agree that for the most part the game is quite challenging, based on your character, team, difficulty and mission choices.
If you choose to do easy 8 person missions (at whatever difficulty) you have decided to make the game easy.
On the other hand running a Assault Rifle/Traps Corruptor solo is quite challenging at relentless. (for me I acutally only did Vicious until around 30 because it was too hard)
Doesn't mean you can't team but always playing with the "perfect" team build makes the game a lot easier. Try a team of 8 stalkers and you won't be knocking around groups of level 54 Bosses easily 
.
----------------------------
You can't please everyone, so lets concentrate on me.
How about 'PvP Difficulty'? When you enter a mission it's like you're fighting in a PvP zones with all the limitations thereof?
It can be Difficulty level 6. Identical to Invincible in all other ways. No additional reward, just more difficulty.
-Rachel-