I16: Super-Sidekicking Explained
By
a tame rabbit,
Posted on: 2009-08-12 10:06 in Developers' Corner
Quote:
This seems like a reasonable solution, but it could be difficult as hell to implement.
|
Originally Posted by Rodion
The real problem is that experienced players don't need that learning step, but they still have to "suffer" through the first 20 levels.
Here's an idea: give a player's sub-20 characters an XP buff that's equal to the sum of the total number of levels of all the characters on the account (or server, if account is too hard). Limit it to, say, 200% (double what you get from double XP weekend). If you have 4 level 50s or 8 level 25s you'd cap your lowbie XP buff. |
Where to now?
Check out all my guides and fiction pieces on my blog.
The MFing Warshade | The Last Rule of Tanking | The Got Dam Mastermind
Everything Dark Armor | The Softcap
don'T attempt to read tHis mEssaGe, And believe Me, it is not a codE.
It doesn't surprise me that there are people complaining about the exp buff to pre-20 characters. It doesn't surprise me because I know people will complain about anything. But it still baffles me.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.
|
Quote:
The point is when there is a new box ont he shelves people think of it as a new game. I heard a good number of people here locally referring to the MA Box as 'That new hero game' even a few clerks in the videogame stores were under the impression that the MA box was a new game, sort of CoH 2. Yes they were wrong but someone just wandering into the game store very likely won't know this game is over 5 years old.|
Originally Posted by biff10426
Point is, I don't think this games sub's are going to jump up wildly due to Issue 16, or GR. GR will give them some extra dough due to sales, maybe, but the games been out for 4 years. People who won't bother with it suddenly won't bother with it now that you can have green fireballs and pink ice armor, come on.
|
People who are drawn into Champions may get irked about one little thing or another will very likely try CoH. When I was new to CoH it was my first MMO, and I had so much fun I went around trying other MMOs games I had ignored the first time around. And to think that customization won't have any effect on new players or better yet old players who left is a little ignorant, it probably won't be a massive influx of people but even a slight increase after 5 years is good ... Besides CoH has had upswings in memberships before for less
OOh, so now my 'friend' won't be able to un-sk me when we're in the thick of a fight.
I LIKE!
No, really, I want to shout out AWESOME, echoing each and every other poster who has suggested Awesomeness.
Well done Posi and Team.
(and the email fix, bliss).
Ex
--
Ex.
Part-Troll, who used to be Excession777, now playing pantomime with people's mindlets.
--
I just want to say thanks. I'm so tired of having to figure out sk's and exemps to make things work. If you couldn't find just the right level people on at the same time it was so annoying.
Quote:
I removed the name from the quote because I am not intentionally targeting them. Several people have made similar statements already about how you will be able to keep all your powers. Please don't do that. While it would be nice, I can already picture the explosion of tempers on the forums after I16 if this proves not to be the case. Countless people swearing that "Positron promised we'd be able to keep all our powers". To clarify what was actually said...| They are working on being able to use all your powers even when exemplared. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Positron
Now we are aware of a couple things that this system doesnt do so well, and we are attempting to address most of them in the coming weeks. The first of this is the fact that you lose access to powers, especially the most-recently earned ones, when you Exemplar down. We are looking into some sort of fix for this.
|
"We are looking into some sort of fix for this."
First of all, "looking into" does not mean "promising". It means they are aware of it, and are examining possible options.
Secondly, "some sort of fix" in no way implies that "all powers will be available". It doesn't even imply they are considering making all powers available.
Is that what the majority of players would probably LIKE? No doubt. Is it likely? I am not getting my hopes up because of the obvious balance concerns, even if powers are scaled down.
For examples of why simply scaling down powers is ineffective, have a look at Rikti, Zombies, and Custom characters in MA missions. The availability of more powers makes these vastly easier to fight at higher levels vs lower levels, despite the fact that they con the same.
Again, to the person I quoted, I am not intentionally singling you out. I noticed several people making similar statements and when I looked for an example, yours was the first I came across.
- Garielle
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Frosty_Femme
I said "ur" which is not a word. It's a sound dumb people make when you ask them to spell out "you are".
|
Quote:
My thoughts exactly so far. This issue doesn't have a downside to it, and is giving me everything I wished for since day one.
|
Originally Posted by Part_Troll
OOh, so now my 'friend' won't be able to un-sk me when we're in the thick of a fight.
I LIKE! No, really, I want to shout out AWESOME, echoing each and every other poster who has suggested Awesomeness. Well done Posi and Team. (and the email fix, bliss). Ex |
Where to now?
Check out all my guides and fiction pieces on my blog.
The MFing Warshade | The Last Rule of Tanking | The Got Dam Mastermind
Everything Dark Armor | The Softcap
don'T attempt to read tHis mEssaGe, And believe Me, it is not a codE.
Quote:
People only read what the want to read. I do data analysis for a school district (talk to teachers, admin, get numbers ready to send off to state, stuff like that)|
Originally Posted by Garielle
...
"We are looking into some sort of fix for this." ... |
Reading comprehension is a bit abysmal nation wide.
Even so the only "fix" I really want is travel powers. I want my "inertia" based toon with SS from lvl 1. If I wait till lvl 14 for it, I want to still keep it if exempd (Superman doesn't ever lose his speed just for hanging out with batman, he just tells batman to hop in the bat mobile).
Other than that, it would be convienant to keep self rez's. but thats just cause it helps teaming.
The Idea I had in mind as the "fix" was you get the powers, but none of the enhancments. So you "can" use them, but they are expensive, weak hitting, etc. Then you lose nothing thematically with your toon, while still staying fairly balanced for the level.
Or They could let everything through, so your lvl 50 exemp'd to 1 does damage as a lvl 1, but you feel "epic"
Quote:
ancient cox secret...not allowed to tell you what we plan on doing to get around this .|
Originally Posted by Lady_Sadako
So one L50 SKing 7 level 1s to L50 and running around a map defeating things to level them up is easier than what we have now? Sounds to me like it would be far, far slower.
|
it wont stop p.ling in any forms..but its still a nice feature of teaming without a doubt.im looking forward to it.issue 16 is gonna be the best in 2 years imo.
Quote:
What "impossible" things?|
Originally Posted by Haruu
These same things are the things that Cryptic magically made possible with their new game. Its not all that bizzar it would take both companies about the same time to come out with "impossible" features.
|
Don't confuse "impossible" with "hugely time consuming and would suck up way to much of our manhours for a long time to do".
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
I really don't like this idea. Do not want.
Arc ID: 348998 - Becoming a villain
Arc ID: 373341 - To Save a Hero
Got Inf?
Quote:
I used quotes around that word for a reason. Its the same word they themselves used. Don't confuse punctuation with semantics.|
Originally Posted by Rajani_Isa
What "impossible" things?
Don't confuse "impossible" with "hugely time consuming and would suck up way to much of our manhours for a long time to do". |
P.S. what is a
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rajani_Isa
manhours
|
P.P.S. Here is the direct quote from what I said, in which I point out Cryptic said what was impossible, (thus using their words which although should be quoted, the forum threads about it back then arn't here to be quoted) and later use the word in quotes in the quotes. The quotes tend to mean someones exact words, not nessessairly my own view. Even look at the title of the article about I16.... it is called something along the lines of "Doing the impossible" because our current dev staff see that they even are guilty of saying it was "impossible" and so are playing off their old beliefs.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Haruu
Side Note:
Since the day that PNC bought CoX, they have been working on things said to be impossible by Cryptic. These same things are the things that Cryptic magically made possible with their new game. Its not all that bizzar it would take both companies about the same time to come out with "impossible" features. The time it took Cryptic to rewrite everything (and change a few things) is about the same time our "other stuff" has taken our dev's to make. |
P.P.P.P.S. For the most part, weather I agree or disagree with the people on this thread, it has mostly been a sharing of ideas, and not a game of nit-picking/semantics.
Will the tether range on the S/K be removed?
Or will everyone have to be within S/K range of the mission owner.
Also, if the range is removed, will it work across zones like Exemping does?
(sorry if a dev other then Posi answerd this. I stopped reading after page 7, but did look at POSIs post history and didn't see the question addressed by him)
OMG i wish this would have come out soo long ago! so much time lost.so many lives shattered by having to play a toon i wasnt into anymore so everyone on the team could jam in the same level range.Super SK sounds great.
Yaaay! additional hard and soft spam controls.
Posi, if you werent comprised of toxic nuclear energy incarnate incased in a Quasi-Impervious shell to protect our reality from being purged with green atomic antimatter, i would reach across cyberspace to shake your hand.
Quote:
Actually Positron answered this in the original post. Paragraph 7 of the original post:|
Originally Posted by DocBot
Will the tether range on the S/K be removed?
Or will everyone have to be within S/K range of the mission owner. Also, if the range is removed, will it work across zones like Exemping does? (sorry if a dev other then Posi answerd this. I stopped reading after page 7, but did look at POSIs post history and didn't see the question addressed by him) |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Positron
One of the other advantages to this system is that the level adjustments take place no matter where you are in the game. No more My sidekick is out of range messages. If you are about to undergo a large level shift, you will have a dialog box pop-up giving you warning and the ability to leave the team (handy if you are in combat at the time and dont want to suddenly be fighting at a lower level). The range of levels that this dialog pops up is adjustable in the Options screen.
|
- Garielle
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Frosty_Femme
I said "ur" which is not a word. It's a sound dumb people make when you ask them to spell out "you are".
|
Issue 16 just keeps getting better and better. The other day I tried to take my team through my MA arc- only to realize that most of them couldn't run the thing, being too low in level. Now that will change. I am liking this- being able to team with anybody and not worry about the whole "SK tetris" business.
A (Golden Gate) Bridge Too Far- arc 299315
Crazy NIMBY's, Railroad robber barons, and kickboxing Engineers, Oh My! Go back in time and join the fight to save a San Francisco icon!
:Smacks Forehead:
Oh boy...here we go again with "extensive data-mining"...I love how this term gets applied to massive changes that inherently the devs feel they need to make, but can't fully justify it by any other means. I also don't understand why is it lately when the devs announce some new and interesting features - like new power sets or game content, they have to sour it by removing a game mechanic they admit to not really being a problem right off the bat! Posi states that the concern for bridging requests really wasn't as big as a problem as they thought! It was a misperception by the dev team! But hey, since our data-mining shows that requests for bridging isn't a problem like we "thought", then lets go ahead and change it quick now! Come on...the only reason why it doesn't show up in your data-mining is because you probably only looked at the last 4 to 6 months. Hello, that is how long AE has been out and there hasn't been a need for bridges - you already fixed that! LOL However you "over-corrected". If you really want us to use the non-AE game content again, maybe (and I cringe to suggest this) simply turn off auto-SKing in AEs or apply this new system only to AEs and people will eventually not abuse it (I mean enjoy it) so much. They will go back to the more "balanced" system that already exists! Now, you may reply with "well we don't want to see the spam of bridging again" ...well again, sounds like you "added" a new mechanic that is going to be awesome which is the email/broadcast filter. Based on actual game play (not short-term "extensive data-mining"), it's the broadcasting and emails that annoy people the most. If other players don't see how some other players choose to play the game, then obviously they can't complain about it. Hence, 1) add broadcast/email filters, 2) leave SKing alone or add your new way as an "option", 3) Fix AE so it doesn't auto SK and allow it to be the alternate mission creator it was intended to be.
Ultimately, the dev team really needs to consider how far it "over-corrects" a problem they recently created and not practically re-write the entire game in one issue. It was bad enough you couldn't adjust certain ATs for PvP, now you are taking that same philosophy to PvE. PLEASE seriously consider this new CoX 2.0 before you force it on us!
Globals: Johnnykat & Johnnykat2
http://johnnykat.deviantart.com/
Quote:
Oddly there have only been a very few people with problems with this new system of sking. Can you tell me what is great about not having the team all teamable? What about the current system of teaming is better than being able to play with absolutly anyone without playing mentor/SK tetris? What about doorsitting is fun for the general pop? At least with this new system, PLing will only happen "fast" if everyone contributes. At least with this new system i can play with my SG, with my current project character. What is so bad about more freedom to play for fun, at a cost of playing for powergaming?|
Originally Posted by Johnnykat
:Smacks Forehead:
Oh boy...here we go again with "extensive data-mining"...I love how this term gets applied to massive changes that inherently the devs feel they need to make, but can't fully justify it by any other means. I also don't understand why is it lately when the devs announce some new and interesting features - like new power sets or game content, they have to sour it by removing a game mechanic they admit to not really being a problem right off the bat! Posi states that the concern for bridging requests really wasn't as big as a problem as they thought! It was a misperception by the dev team! But hey, since our data-mining shows that requests for bridging isn't a problem like we "thought", then lets go ahead and change it quick now! Come on...the only reason why it doesn't show up in your data-mining is because you probably only looked at the last 4 to 6 months. Hello, that is how long AE has been out and there hasn't been a need for bridges - you already fixed that! LOL However you "over-corrected". If you really want us to use the non-AE game content again, maybe (and I cringe to suggest this) simply turn off auto-SKing in AEs or apply this new system only to AEs and people will eventually not abuse it (I mean enjoy it) so much. They will go back to the more "balanced" system that already exists! Now, you may reply with "well we don't want to see the spam of bridging again" ...well again, sounds like you "added" a new mechanic that is going to be awesome which is the email/broadcast filter. Based on actual game play (not short-term "extensive data-mining"), it's the broadcasting and emails that annoy people the most. If other players don't see how some other players choose to play the game, then obviously they can't complain about it. Hence, 1) add broadcast/email filters, 2) leave SKing alone or add your new way as an "option", 3) Fix AE so it doesn't auto SK and allow it to be the alternate mission creator it was intended to be. Ultimately, the dev team really needs to consider how far it "over-corrects" a problem they recently created and not practically re-write the entire game in one issue. It was bad enough you couldn't adjust certain ATs for PvP, now you are taking that same philosophy to PvE. PLEASE seriously consider this new CoX 2.0 before you force it on us! |
I am a Min/Maxing Gamer. I am a rules lawyer. I am NOT a munchkin, and therefore I play the game for fun. Your fun might be to "beat" the game. Your fun might be to raise a ruckus. Your fun might be be to lower morale. Your fun evidently is not within the means of a game that the largest population plays togeather.
To quote many people before me "Lvl 50 is the goal, 1-49 is the journey. Enjoy the journey."
Nothing about this system affects the journey, except making it a bit longer by also making every party member matter (Instead of telling the sk that is at -5 to sitout).
Next point. PVP in this game has always been troublesome. BUT before Stalkers were the I WIN button. Now every AT has at least 1 semi-viable PVP build. I would count that as progress.
Last point. Just because you don't like the term, doesn't mean they don't datamine. If most people don't bridge, and bridging is a problem, then oddly enough taking it away affects total population-most people. If Bridging is a problem, and most people do bridge, then the game is fixed to be more in line with how it is supposed to be.
I have another "fix" for bridging. Its called do what every ther MMO does and don't allow people to party outside of a 5 level range. That would kill all parties in this game.
Another "fix" would be to set 30 min timers to every mish, so mishes arnt really farmable. That ruins the content players.
Another "fix" is to make it where party members dont get xp for the kills if they are further away from the mob being killed than 20 ft. That ruins the people that can solo in teams to speed things up (Scrappers, Stalkers, Brutes, MM's, Etc)
Or the "fix" i like best is to encourage everyone to play togeather by taking out the need for mentors.
Quote:
Gonna have to agree with Haaru, this is a lot of sturm und drang over nothing. You haven't even mentioned in this post any issues you potentially see arising. You just kinda rail on assuming we all know why you don't like the new option, without ever really giving a reason...
|
Originally Posted by Johnnykat
:Smacks Forehead:
Oh boy...here we go again with "extensive data-mining"...I love how this term gets applied to massive changes that inherently the devs feel they need to make, but can't fully justify it by any other means. I also don't understand why is it lately when the devs announce some new and interesting features - like new power sets or game content, they have to sour it by removing a game mechanic they admit to not really being a problem right off the bat! Posi states that the concern for bridging requests really wasn't as big as a problem as they thought! It was a misperception by the dev team! But hey, since our data-mining shows that requests for bridging isn't a problem like we "thought", then lets go ahead and change it quick now! Come on...the only reason why it doesn't show up in your data-mining is because you probably only looked at the last 4 to 6 months. Hello, that is how long AE has been out and there hasn't been a need for bridges - you already fixed that! LOL However you "over-corrected". If you really want us to use the non-AE game content again, maybe (and I cringe to suggest this) simply turn off auto-SKing in AEs or apply this new system only to AEs and people will eventually not abuse it (I mean enjoy it) so much. They will go back to the more "balanced" system that already exists! Now, you may reply with "well we don't want to see the spam of bridging again" ...well again, sounds like you "added" a new mechanic that is going to be awesome which is the email/broadcast filter. Based on actual game play (not short-term "extensive data-mining"), it's the broadcasting and emails that annoy people the most. If other players don't see how some other players choose to play the game, then obviously they can't complain about it. Hence, 1) add broadcast/email filters, 2) leave SKing alone or add your new way as an "option", 3) Fix AE so it doesn't auto SK and allow it to be the alternate mission creator it was intended to be. Ultimately, the dev team really needs to consider how far it "over-corrects" a problem they recently created and not practically re-write the entire game in one issue. It was bad enough you couldn't adjust certain ATs for PvP, now you are taking that same philosophy to PvE. PLEASE seriously consider this new CoX 2.0 before you force it on us! |
Wavicle, Energy/Energy Blaster, dinged 50 in Issue 4, summer of 2005.
@Wavicle, mostly on the Justice server.
Positron, these sound simply awsome. But one thing about the new things coming thru for the in system email. Put in a feature that allows comments from people who run your AE programs to bypass the filter.
Setting it so that you get emails blocked from spammers and inf sellers is awsome, but just make sure it doesnt also block the person who's trying to give you a nice pat on the back for a well written story.
'If Champions Online is what "CoH was supposed to be", I'm glad that I have what I have rather than "what it was supposed to be".' - The Alt oholic
"I solo'd Hamidon...but I also totally cheated." - Back Alley Brawler
"It is still early. Someone is going to get stabbed tonight I can feel it." - Ishmael (said in Jello Shooters chat)
Quote:
Thats a great Idea. Maybe when an Arc is rated, there is a feedback option, which auto e-mails you. Or create a feedback tab in MA to let you see players feedback of your arcs.
|
Originally Posted by Protonic_Flux
Positron, these sound simply awsome. But one thing about the new things coming thru for the in system email. Put in a feature that allows comments from people who run your AE programs to bypass the filter.
Setting it so that you get emails blocked from spammers and inf sellers is awsome, but just make sure it doesnt also block the person who's trying to give you a nice pat on the back for a well written story. |
Quote:
I have my feedback set to off. |
Originally Posted by Haruu
Thats a great Idea. Maybe when an Arc is rated, there is a feedback option, which auto e-mails you. Or create a feedback tab in MA to let you see players feedback of your arcs.
|
Maybe if some people learned not to say Horrible things, I would turn it back on.
I think TBH - MA Arc feedback should have like 20 or 30 Canned choices to pick from... and then the feedback giver have the option of leaving their global handle, so if the mission maker wants their candid feedback, they can at their liesure send them a tell.
Quote:
Unless they changed it, MA feedback comes via Global Tell.
|
Originally Posted by Protonic_Flux
Positron, these sound simply awsome. But one thing about the new things coming thru for the in system email. Put in a feature that allows comments from people who run your AE programs to bypass the filter.
Setting it so that you get emails blocked from spammers and inf sellers is awsome, but just make sure it doesnt also block the person who's trying to give you a nice pat on the back for a well written story. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by reiella
Until I see something that states to the contrary, going to assume VK is right
. |
Quote:
The data mining did show that the the "issue" of people broadcasting for fillers and stuff isn't as big a deal as they thought, but that's not the only reason the changes are being made. You're ignoring the bigger picture, because this new system will make teaming exponentially easier for all players involved. No longer do we have to make sure the team is comprised of at least 50% people in the right range, and no longer do we have to only look for people our level and LOWER. It's also the end of pointless level restrictions and sidekick leashes. This is a big boon to teaming and convenience.|
Originally Posted by Johnnykat
:Smacks Forehead:
Oh boy...here we go again with "extensive data-mining"...I love how this term gets applied to massive changes that inherently the devs feel they need to make, but can't fully justify it by any other means. I also don't understand why is it lately when the devs announce some new and interesting features - like new power sets or game content, they have to sour it by removing a game mechanic they admit to not really being a problem right off the bat! Posi states that the concern for bridging requests really wasn't as big as a problem as they thought! It was a misperception by the dev team! But hey, since our data-mining shows that requests for bridging isn't a problem like we "thought", then lets go ahead and change it quick now! |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Johnnykat
Come on...the only reason why it doesn't show up in your data-mining is because you probably only looked at the last 4 to 6 months. Hello, that is how long AE has been out and there hasn't been a need for bridges - you already fixed that! LOL However you "over-corrected". If you really want us to use the non-AE game content again, maybe (and I cringe to suggest this) simply turn off auto-SKing in AEs or apply this new system only to AEs and people will eventually not abuse it (I mean enjoy it) so much. They will go back to the more "balanced" system that already exists!
|
Normal content: At least 50% of the team has to be within about 3 levels to the level of the mission.
AE content: Invite anyone and everyone.
What's not to like about that? Why would we want to artificially create that hindrance and reinstate the annoyances of having to find people within a certain level range? In fact, what's wrong with the way AE does it that makes you want to disable it? And what makes you think it's more "balanced?"
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Johnnykat
Now, you may reply with "well we don't want to see the spam of bridging again" ...well again, sounds like you "added" a new mechanic that is going to be awesome which is the email/broadcast filter. Based on actual game play (not short-term "extensive data-mining"), it's the broadcasting and emails that annoy people the most. If other players don't see how some other players choose to play the game, then obviously they can't complain about it. Hence, 1) add broadcast/email filters, 2) leave SKing alone or add your new way as an "option", 3) Fix AE so it doesn't auto SK and allow it to be the alternate mission creator it was intended to be.
|
I can't think of any possible benefit the old SK system has over the new one. What could you possibly gain from limiting SKing to just two people instead of the whole team? What's "better" about having to only team with people who are very close to your level? What's the advantage to the sidekick leash? What feature does the current SK system have that the new one will not have?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Johnnykat
Ultimately, the dev team really needs to consider how far it "over-corrects" a problem they recently created and not practically re-write the entire game in one issue. It was bad enough you couldn't adjust certain ATs for PvP, now you are taking that same philosophy to PvE. PLEASE seriously consider this new CoX 2.0 before you force it on us!
|
What's flawed or over-corrected about allowing a team of players, regardless of level, do a mission instead of limiting and restricting who can go on a mission with who?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.
|
If anything I'd prefer to get a quicker end-game rather than the early game, which is already pretty quick and is pretty much a neccessary learning step for newbies.
Here's an idea: give a player's sub-20 characters an XP buff that's equal to the sum of the total number of levels of all the characters on the account (or server, if account is too hard). Limit it to, say, 200% (double what you get from double XP weekend).
If you have 4 level 50s or 8 level 25s you'd cap your lowbie XP buff.