Archetype Popularity Analysis (repost)
By
5th_Player,
Posted on: 2009-07-22 15:19 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Redside needs more love. That's not exactly a mystery.
[/ QUOTE ]
IMO it's fundamentally flawed. It's supposed "virtues" make your efforts seem small and unimportant. I shall rejoice when GR allows me to redeem my villains and hopefully start the ATs in Paragon.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure I completely agree with that general sentiment, but I do think that the red side is a little too much "Lawful Evil." And when it isn't Lawful Evil, it usually jumps to Chaotic A**hole.
I think the better target for City of Villains should have been "Neutral Selfish." Although after The Dark Knight came out, Bat-sh*t Crazy would have been popular as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
Arc branching, or at least some sort of dialog branching, would have been fantastic for CoV. It would have significantly increased the work to create a quality arc, but it could have offered at least two of the common RP options we seem to see players mention they prefer often here on the boards: "I'm a hard-edged but honorable criminal" and "I eat babies three meals day". We seem to get a lot of polar arguments against CoV's representation of the the villainous acts, where some people don't find them villainous at all, and others think they are too much (usually in reference to Phipps, Themari or giving civilians to the Vahzilok).
The other main complaint though is the "you're a meta-lackey" syndrome so many arcs have. That's been a drum beat loud since CoV came along, and which we've only recently actively seen them give some attention to. (The text changes for the BSF were good.) IMO, they just needed to think about that harder. I don't know why they would think it would be widely considered fun to be thugs constantly doing other people's dirty work in an environment where a lot of NPCs are portrayed as being fairly idiotic and underacheiving. Requirement for metahuman survival and destructive capabilities aside, it doesn't feel all that "super".
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 ]
Bat-sh*t Crazy
[/ QUOTE ]
The title for Issue 17 perhaps?
I always thought that villains needed to have weaker powers than heroes in tiers 1-6 and much much nastier/unpredictable powers in tiers 7-9. Long recharge, huge endurance cost, insane damage, horrible side effects.
PRTECTR4EVR
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
-Heroes get more attention because it is the original game, the game opens up to the City of Heroes screen, rather than the City of Villains screen, and as said before, everyone loves a hero.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's entirely dependent on what set of CDs or which installer you used to install the game. I rebuilt my PC some time ago and installed using the CoV CDs (since I didn't want to use the updater you can download). I get the CoV splash screen when I start up the game. I actually think you can swap them out by just pointing to a different executable regardless of what you used to install the game.
Players that started with City of Villains may be used to seeing a CoV splash screen. No idea what kind of splash screen the Mission Architect version uses, but I think it's different than the one used by CoH.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually the splash screen is determined by what you logged onto last. If you were last playing a villain, then the next time you log in, you will see the villain background, if you last logged into a hero, the next time you log in you will see the hero background.
And as for villain-side downsizing, I'm sure the disparity in zone/content red-side vs blue-side has something to do with it.
Edited for spelling.
[ QUOTE ]
Actually the splash screen is determined by what you logged onto last. If you were last playing a villain, then the next time you log in, you will see the villain background, if you last logged into a hero, the next time you log in you will see the hero background.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's not correct. I will get the CoV splash screen every time I logon to CoH/CoV the very first time. I will get the CoH splash screen if I log out after initially logging on and switch to a hero.
From my end:
Namesake is the first hero I created, Mind/Bubbles. Gave me a soft spot for Controllers.
My first villain was a Stalker...at CoV live launch. Did the "Sneak to end, AS Boss and guards" so much I missed most of the content. Rushed to 50 to realize there were no VEATs and then played CoH most of the rest of the time.
I recently rolled another Stalker and am enjoying her more than the first one.
Blasters...I have a 35 Ice/EM and a 25 AR/MM. I doubt I will ever level a Blaster to 50. It's not so bad till the 30s, when you fight Freakshow, Devouring Earth, Crey, then Malta Ops and others. Stuns, Sleeps, Holds, all sorts of stuff. Sure I carry Break Frees but I'm also dead a lot, even with the new Defiance. I usually pop 2-3 reds, Aim+Build Up then tear into some mobs and a patrol gets me or I overcommit and die. Just not fun.
I guess Blasters just aren't for 'me'. When I want to Blast I log in my Rad/Therm Corruptor, my Storm/Sonic Defender, my whichever...I like shooting stuff but I also like buffing, debuffing, toggling defenses, choosing which defenses to use, timing my click heals instead of going 'attack attack attack attack attack' all the time.
My favorites:
Corruptor - Damage PLUS debuffs/heals/buffs
Controller - Damage PLUS debuffs/heals/buffs
Defender - Damage PLUS debuffs/heals/buffs
Scrapper - Damage PLUS toggles/heals/aggro management
Peacebringer - Damage PLUS toggles/heals/aggro management/versatility
VEAT - Damage PLUS teamwork toggles/versatility
I also like Dominators a lot. I've always thought of Dominators and Corruptors as 'fixed' Blasters. They can hold and damage, damage and debuff, damage and do other stuff...I get bored only attacking, I like to 'meta' my mobs between heals, debuffs, toggles, attacks...maybe I'm just weird. 
Questions about the game, either side? /t @Neuronia or @Neuronium, with your queries!
168760: A Death in the Gish. 3 missions, 1-14. Easy to solo.
Infinity Villains
Champion, Pinnacle, Virtue Heroes
[ QUOTE ]
From my end:
Namesake is the first hero I created, Mind/Bubbles. Gave me a soft spot for Controllers.
My first villain was a Stalker...at CoV live launch. Did the "Sneak to end, AS Boss and guards" so much I missed most of the content. Rushed to 50 to realize there were no VEATs and then played CoH most of the rest of the time.
I recently rolled another Stalker and am enjoying her more than the first one.
Blasters...I have a 35 Ice/EM and a 25 AR/MM. I doubt I will ever level a Blaster to 50. It's not so bad till the 30s, when you fight Freakshow, Devouring Earth, Crey, then Malta Ops and others. Stuns, Sleeps, Holds, all sorts of stuff. Sure I carry Break Frees but I'm also dead a lot, even with the new Defiance. I usually pop 2-3 reds, Aim+Build Up then tear into some mobs and a patrol gets me or I overcommit and die. Just not fun.
I guess Blasters just aren't for 'me'. When I want to Blast I log in my Rad/Therm Corruptor, my Storm/Sonic Defender, my whichever...I like shooting stuff but I also like buffing, debuffing, toggling defenses, choosing which defenses to use, timing my click heals instead of going 'attack attack attack attack attack' all the time.
My favorites:
Corruptor - Damage PLUS debuffs/heals/buffs
Controller - Damage PLUS debuffs/heals/buffs
Defender - Damage PLUS debuffs/heals/buffs
Scrapper - Damage PLUS toggles/heals/aggro management
Peacebringer - Damage PLUS toggles/heals/aggro management/versatility
VEAT - Damage PLUS teamwork toggles/versatility
I also like Dominators a lot. I've always thought of Dominators and Corruptors as 'fixed' Blasters. They can hold and damage, damage and debuff, damage and do other stuff...I get bored only attacking, I like to 'meta' my mobs between heals, debuffs, toggles, attacks...maybe I'm just weird.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are not wierd as blastroller playstyle has always been popular. 
[ QUOTE ]
Redside needs more love. That's not exactly a mystery.
[/ QUOTE ]
No I think people should team more on redside, but people will always head to blue side because they can team. If folks did the same on redside then people would not be crying foul.
Post Comic book Fan Films that ROCK!
Fight my brute
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Redside needs more love. That's not exactly a mystery.
[/ QUOTE ]
IMO it's fundamentally flawed. It's supposed "virtues" make your efforts seem small and unimportant. I shall rejoice when GR allows me to redeem my villains and hopefully start the ATs in Paragon.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure I completely agree with that general sentiment, but I do think that the red side is a little too much "Lawful Evil." And when it isn't Lawful Evil, it usually jumps to Chaotic A**hole.
I think the better target for City of Villains should have been "Neutral Selfish." Although after The Dark Knight came out, Bat-sh*t Crazy would have been popular as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's part of my problem with Redside, but mostly my problem with Redside is that it doesn't make a lick of sense. No society could run like that, there would be open warfare at all times. The game jumps between a totalitarian state and buffoonish evil.
For example,
[*] Who cares whether LR doesn't want you to kill Arbiters. His troops will attack you anyway.
[*]Why are they so nasty at the university? There's no reason for it. I'll bet in Cuba under Fidel, the instructors at the universities liked some students, hated others, just like in any U.S. college.
[*]I can rob, cheat, murder and steal....but I can't wear a cape because LR says so. K'.
[*]I'm such a badazz villain at level 50 that, of course, I don't have anything better to do than to break into City Hall for some joker I don't know. 
Redside is filled with this nonsense. I like the ATs, I don't like them any better than blue ATs, but they're cool. But they're stuck in a place where doing newspapers tends to make more sense than doing the content. I rejoice when my villains hit 35 because then I can mostly ignore villain content from then on.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
Sorry if this is an obvious observation, but whats really goign to kill redside in going rogue is the AE clustering.
I came back from a hiatus, to find the vast majority of the population in Atlas Park. It's natural for people to centralize out of one AE hub, and you bet your butt, day one of going rogue, people are going to start to head to AP from both sides and get on the xp train.
I know I would love to start a MM, go blue, and mix it up asap.
Quote:
It's still possible that the changes to Stalkers has altered that. We don't know from the data given. Personally, I never had a problem with the description of Stalkers, but I had trouble rationalizing any character concepts within the perceived fragility. I couldn't imagine a werewolf, for instance, that snuck around and struck from surprise but couldn't stand toe to toe with a whole group of foes. A werewolf sounded more like a Brute to me, but of course being a Brute meant I had to sacrifice Claws. (At the time) |
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
It might be that stalkers perform lower than expected, or it might be that their intrinsic playstyle is different than expected, or some combination of both (it could also be that unique to stalkers, players misjudge what they think they want far more often than any other archetype). But something made players want to make them, then not want to play them, relative to other archetypes.
|
The greater resiliance of current Stalkers means it better fits my original concept. Not that I missed that Stalkers weren't that concept, but then, maybe other players did miss that.
Quote:
Everything in this post is potentially very much dated, at the very least for stalkers and dominators. My main motivations for reposting it were that a) people kept asking, b) people still reference it, and c) its the only place where BaB's original data can still be referenced, since his posts went bye-bye as well. If we are ever given updated data, I'll certainly update this post. As it is, though, I recognize that some of the conclusions and analysis here might be moot in terms of the current game, although they might still be interesting to people in the historical sense. Its also the best information we currently have, dated as it is.|
Originally Posted by Jade_Dragon
It's still possible that the changes to Stalkers has altered that. We don't know from the data given. Personally, I never had a problem with the description of Stalkers, but I had trouble rationalizing any character concepts within the perceived fragility. I couldn't imagine a werewolf, for instance, that snuck around and struck from surprise but couldn't stand toe to toe with a whole group of foes. A werewolf sounded more like a Brute to me, but of course being a Brute meant I had to sacrifice Claws. (At the time)
The greater resiliance of current Stalkers means it better fits my original concept. Not that I missed that Stalkers weren't that concept, but then, maybe other players did miss that. |
In any event, while game changes may have changed the current situation, I don't think any new information has come up which invalidates the analysis in terms of its commentary of the state of the game at the time.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Not to turn this into a stalkers thread... but I've been struggling through a Stalker (I've made and deleted probably 15 over the years, but I'm determined to see this one through) and for me, at least, even with the changes what Stalkers contribute to the team always feels like "....And?"
They take care of difficult targets first and fast. So does a blaster. At range. In the same amount of time as Assassin's Strike animates. Actually, some Blasters can drop a spawn in that time. It's a bad example because it mixes Blue and Red, but there's been a bit of co-op endgame stuff lately. Sticking to Redside only... the Dominator also took care of that difficult target. They may have even locked down the entire spawn. Most Brutes also took care of that difficult target, and took alpha for the team doing it. A mastermind who sets all his pets to attack that target ALSO took out that problem target. All the red-side ATs are capable of neutering or flat out destroying a problem minion or lieutenant, and any red-side team is capable of dropping a problem boss in 10 seconds or so.
So that leaves stealth. Traditionally, the stealth classes scouting ahead pinpointing threats is quite useful. In City of X, redside in particular, it is not. Two of the five core ATs have a mechanic that rewards them for moving swiftly, and watching that reward evaporate swiftly (fury) or slowly (domination) *can* alienate the players of those ATs. Plus, stealth really isn't *needed* for anything in the game. A good team will steamroll Hero adds on the LRSF. A bad team will faceplant to Freakshow. Either would have done the same whether they knew what was coming or not.
I love 'stealth' classes. A Stalker was the first thing I rolled as a result. It was also the first character I ever deleted. He only made it to level 17 before I said "The pony, it has one trick." As a brand new player to the game - with no expectations of any AT.
Weight training: Because you'll never hear someone lament "If only I were weaker, I could have saved them."
Quote:
I felt the same way as you playing my En/En Stalker, but my Electric/Ninjitsu Stalker is at L47 now and it has been like playing a completely different archetype. In the same way as some Corruptors/Defenders play completely differently to each other depending on their debuffing/buffing powersets, an Electric Melee Stalker is world's apart when compared to single-target melee sets like DM/, EM/, MA/ etc. on Stalkers.|
Originally Posted by TheBruteSquad
Not to turn this into a stalkers thread... but I've been struggling through a Stalker (I've made and deleted probably 15 over the years, but I'm determined to see this one through) and for me, at least, even with the changes what Stalkers contribute to the team always feels like "....And?"
|
My Elec/ stalker can take spawns down faster than many of my brutes/scrappers can solo and truly does feel like a melee-blapper, plus I get to feel like I'm really contributing on teams. Plus when you hit the difficult targets you can still pull out AS and do a nice chunk of single target damage (though single target performance is slightly weaker than other stalker sets outside of AS), but your area burst damage can be truly spectacular and offers the team damage mitigation too (knockdowns from Lightning Rod and Thunderstrike, plus the fear effect if you use an AS first).
I just have to say that I find the OP's thought process impressive. Sometimes, I find myself amazed at the abilities of a poster. Many many kudos to you.
Call me crazy but I think huge increase in Controllers population could be due to AE's ultra fast experience gain? A lot of people think lowbie Controllers is a real pain but after AE's been introduced, they can power level their way to 32 to get pets in a matter of hours.
For example, 4 out of 5 friends made Dominator during double exp/farming madness because that's one AT that they want to really try but never have the "patience" for. I think Controller is seen this way as well.
VEAT is just plain awesome. They are super team-friendly and they don't usually "rely" on anybody to function like how Blasters "need" to be babysit or the team needs Brute/Tank to herd. VEATs just put their toggles on and start slaughtering. I am not surprised more and more people play VEATs. I know Fortunata/Blood Widow are my all-time favorite AT.
I am mostly surprised by Stalker data. It seems Stalker's population has not really increased even after those awesome buffs. That means the buffs "failed", at least it fails its original goal which is to push Stalker population. I mean those who like Stalkers already like them. The buffs just make them more satisfied with the AT.
I don't see much Dominator population increase after I15 either which is weird because Dominators got a lot of buffs!
What if a lot of new players are not "educated" enough to know about those buffs? I mean I've read the character introduction since like 2 years ago. Maybe the dev should improve character intro paragraphs to give new players a more accurate "expectation"? Does the character screen say Dominators have "low" or "medium" damage? In my opinion, Dom's damage is on the "High" scale now.
What's left is to normalize all Assassin Strikes and improve Stalker's old sets (Claw, MA and EM)! You don't need to bring back the missing PbAoE attack. You just need to make the existing ones better! For example, make Slice a WIDER and LONGER cone.
Quote:
I agree. I also think a lot of players are still not educated enough to know that Stalkers get critical bonus with party members. I say screw that 30 radius thing. Just give Stalker critical rate with the increase in party members. Or increase that 30 radius to like 60 radius or even larger.|
Originally Posted by filcher
Just a personal observation: I find Stalkers, in general, do not add anything to a team dynamic. Most people (myself included) that play Stalkers tend to play solo a majority of the time. When buliding a SF team Stalker is the absolute last AT I would invite and I would hesitate to ever have more than 1. I play, and have played, several Stalker toons and often wonder what my "real" role is on a team...certainly not support (buff/debuff/heal), definitely not agro-control (taunt/hold/slow), and as a damage dealer I find Stalkers lacking for a number of reasons (survivability, AoE, dps). Overall I find Stalkers appealing to a small segment of the population due to their "loner" nature in a game of social interaction.
|
Oh and I also think Stalker is way overshadowed by VEATs in general. Sure, Stalker has Assassin Strike but both Night Widow and Bane provide EXCELLENT team buffs while providing similar damage. Are VEATs just too good? At least nobody in CoV can compete in Dominator's controls if the team needs/wants controls.
I honestly think the dev should just give Stalker a bit more aoe. I never understand why Claw needs Swipe or how Martial Arts need all the single kicks. If the dev gives Stalker at least one aoe per set, that should be a lot more team-friendly.
Many people just don't want Stalkers on the team and I don't blame them even though my Spines/EA is built for team. I have 3 aoe in Throw Spines, Spine Burst and Ball of Lightning. My aoe damage is nothing to be laughed at and yet my stalker gets the most "no thanks" whenever I PM for invite.
What's left is to normalize all Assassin Strikes and improve Stalker's old sets (Claw, MA and EM)! You don't need to bring back the missing PbAoE attack. You just need to make the existing ones better! For example, make Slice a WIDER and LONGER cone.
Quote:
So do you think Stalker's buffs only satisfy old Stalker fans and does nothing to increase Stalker population? |
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Everything in this post is potentially very much dated, at the very least for stalkers and dominators. My main motivations for reposting it were that a) people kept asking, b) people still reference it, and c) its the only place where BaB's original data can still be referenced, since his posts went bye-bye as well. If we are ever given updated data, I'll certainly update this post. As it is, though, I recognize that some of the conclusions and analysis here might be moot in terms of the current game, although they might still be interesting to people in the historical sense. Its also the best information we currently have, dated as it is.
In any event, while game changes may have changed the current situation, I don't think any new information has come up which invalidates the analysis in terms of its commentary of the state of the game at the time. |
I was hoping we would see more Dominator after the buffs but maybe the old description just turns off people how Dominator is performing now?
If both Stalker/Dominator still rank the worst with no real obvious increase, then technically the "buffs" did nothing to improve the population?
Which also means that the possible Tanker buffs that many tanker fans want may not improve the population afterall? The buffs just make the fans happier?
What's left is to normalize all Assassin Strikes and improve Stalker's old sets (Claw, MA and EM)! You don't need to bring back the missing PbAoE attack. You just need to make the existing ones better! For example, make Slice a WIDER and LONGER cone.
I was wondering, do we have stas for Primaries or even combos played?
Like how many blasters are fire or ice or sonic? Or even Fire/fire or fire/ice or fire/em? Might be good to know.
-STEELE =)
Allied to all sides so that no matter what, I'll come out on top!
Oh, and Crimson demands you play this arc-> Twisted Knives (MA Arc #397769)
Quote:
Of course they are too good! A properly built VEAT breaks soft capped defense in ranged, melee and AoE like a rocket, has mez protection, damage output comparable to Blasters and team buffs to boot. For me, VEATs illuminate how game balance is not a priority for the developers. |
Originally Posted by Jibikao
Oh and I also think Stalker is way overshadowed by VEATs in general. Sure, Stalker has Assassin Strike but both Night Widow and Bane provide EXCELLENT team buffs while providing similar damage. Are VEATs just too good?
|
Quote:
|
I honestly think the dev should just give Stalker a bit more aoe. I never understand why Claw needs Swipe or how Martial Arts need all the single kicks. If the dev gives Stalker at least one aoe per set, that should be a lot more team-friendly. Many people just don't want Stalkers on the team and I don't blame them even though my Spines/EA is built for team. I have 3 aoe in Throw Spines, Spine Burst and Ball of Lightning. My aoe damage is nothing to be laughed at and yet my stalker gets the most "no thanks" whenever I PM for invite.
|
Giving Stalkers more AoEs would likely just be one more nail in the coffin for Blasters come Going Rogue time. Then again, Blasters always seem popular despite their obvious flaws. I certainly like them because of the challenge they provide.
Quote:
I agree Blasters seem inferior to other ATs but Blaster performs very well in PvP. In fact, I think a properly, well invested/built Blaster for PvP is even better than Stalker!
|
Originally Posted by Seraphael
Of course they are too good! A properly built VEAT breaks soft capped defense in ranged, melee and AoE like a rocket, has mez protection, damage output comparable to Blasters and team buffs to boot. For me, VEATs illuminate how game balance is not a priority for the developers.
My impression is that Spines Scrappers outdamage all Blaster sets but Fire and Archery in teaming situations and all sets solo. A significant proportion of that damage is ranged. It really is incredible to see how the developers have turned away from their early axiom that range is defense with the latter implementations of Spines and VEATs. In comparison Blasters are virtually broken. I wonder how an Energy/ Blaster for instance, will compete for a spot on teams when VEAT builds easily can outdamage him on teams while also being team friendly and superbly survivable. Giving Stalkers more AoEs would likely just be one more nail in the coffin for Blasters come Going Rogue time. Then again, Blasters always seem popular despite their obvious flaws. I certainly like them because of the challenge they provide. |
What's left is to normalize all Assassin Strikes and improve Stalker's old sets (Claw, MA and EM)! You don't need to bring back the missing PbAoE attack. You just need to make the existing ones better! For example, make Slice a WIDER and LONGER cone.
Quote:
It would be really neat to see, but unfortunately we don't have such information. In fact the information posted in this thread (as pointed out by the OP) is antiquated and at this point not much more useful than a conversation piece.|
Originally Posted by EmperorSteele
I was wondering, do we have stas for Primaries or even combos played?
Like how many blasters are fire or ice or sonic? Or even Fire/fire or fire/ice or fire/em? Might be good to know. |
New info would be great, I wonder if it would show a significant positive increase for stalkers and doms...
Quote:
I think buffs have only indirect effects on archetype populations, although those indirect effects can be large. Which is to say, someone that has never played the archetype before isn't likely to fully understand or appreciate those buffs, while those that are already playing those archetypes are, well, already playing them and represented in the statistics already. I think the main way in which buffs can increase an archetype's popularity is by word of mouth: other players playing the archetype can start recommending it more strongly to other players, or contrawise players can reverse bad impressions of them by observing their (improved) performance in-game. |
Originally Posted by Jibikao
So do you think Stalker's buffs only satisfy old Stalker fans and does nothing to increase Stalker population?
|
Of course the small publicity-buzz that comes from being buffed can attract some attention to the archetype. But I think one of the conclusions of the statistics that is still probably valid today is that no archetype completely fails to attract people to play it: the larger factor to whether an archetype will be "popular" or not appears to be player-retention. And because of that, archetype populations themselves are driven by relatively slow forces.
I'm somewhat hopeful that the stalker buffs back then improved matters for stalkers. I'm somewhat more hopeful that the recent buffs to dominators will likely improve their retention ratio over time.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
While the recent Dominator buffs were nice for casual players, the associated nerf to PSW likely reduced their popularity among farmers, and increased the popularity of Brutes.
That said, I think we should really look at something different to see what people are playing. Honestly, the initial AT info is misleading, and probably produces a disproportionately high number of Brutes, Scrappers, and Blasters. People playing around with costumes are probably more likely to pick the top AT (Brutes or Blasters). Ditto for people making fillers, mules, marketeering drones, or other chars where AT doesn't really matter. And someone could make 5 Scrappers before realizing they want something tougher, so those Scrappers last an hour but the Tanker makes it to 50.
So what would be a more realistic way to measure what people are playing? Well the /search list is about the only tool available to players, but I think it'll do everything needed. You can /search and get a list of chars by AT and level, and I think level is important. It can take a while, but it should be fairly easy to log in to every server and get a count of chars by AT. You can add up the total levels of each AT or just count chars in certain level ranges (say around 1-15, 16-39, and 40-50). Maybe I'll do it some night. Or someone else could. Nudge, nudge.
Goodbye and thanks for all the fish.
I've moved on to Diablo 3, TopDoc-1304
Quote:
What about data-mining that involved criteria like:|
Originally Posted by TopDoc
While the recent Dominator buffs were nice for casual players, the associated nerf to PSW likely reduced their popularity among farmers, and increased the popularity of Brutes.
That said, I think we should really look at something different to see what people are playing. Honestly, the initial AT info is misleading, and probably produces a disproportionately high number of Brutes, Scrappers, and Blasters. People playing around with costumes are probably more likely to pick the top AT (Brutes or Blasters). Ditto for people making fillers, mules, marketeering drones, or other chars where AT doesn't really matter. And someone could make 5 Scrappers before realizing they want something tougher, so those Scrappers last an hour but the Tanker makes it to 50. So what would be a more realistic way to measure what people are playing? Well the /search list is about the only tool available to players, but I think it'll do everything needed. You can /search and get a list of chars by AT and level, and I think level is important. It can take a while, but it should be fairly easy to log in to every server and get a count of chars by AT. You can add up the total levels of each AT or just count chars in certain level ranges (say around 1-15, 16-39, and 40-50). Maybe I'll do it some night. Or someone else could. Nudge, nudge. |
*Character played at least 20,80,120 hours of the last 60 days?
*Characters logged in above level 20 (to avoid simple padders and marteteers) but below level 40, vs level 40+ (you kinda mentioned this)
*Characters logged in on accounts over a year old, vs under a year old.
#A combo of all 3
With all three you would see, what AT's are being played longest at a time (thus tend to be more "fun"). You would also see what AT's are making it to the end game vs, "getting too hard to play," vs "not fun at all." Lastly you would see what the "vets" play over what the "n00bs" play.
I think this would be a better descriptor of current trends. Most people I know get a 50, then make a HEAT and quit before lvl 20. Not all, but most. Most "vets" i know go for broken/farming builds over "just for fun" builds. Also I know alot of people that only log in to change dayjobs and log out, which would inflate numbers on played vs unplayed toons.
[ QUOTE ]
-Heroes get more attention because it is the original game, the game opens up to the City of Heroes screen, rather than the City of Villains screen, and as said before, everyone loves a hero.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's entirely dependent on what set of CDs or which installer you used to install the game. I rebuilt my PC some time ago and installed using the CoV CDs (since I didn't want to use the updater you can download). I get the CoV splash screen when I start up the game. I actually think you can swap them out by just pointing to a different executable regardless of what you used to install the game.
Players that started with City of Villains may be used to seeing a CoV splash screen. No idea what kind of splash screen the Mission Architect version uses, but I think it's different than the one used by CoH.