The game is tedious


Ad Astra

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
If you're referring to me:
What do suggestions for a power set than spans multiple ATs have to do with suggestions specific for one AT?

You're confusing two different subjects, both of which I've made many suggestions for.



I called Invul neglected because at the time in had been a long time since any changes had been made to it. WP was rappidly becoming the defensive powerset of choice and because of it being newer, enjoyed advantages and improvments to its design the older sets didn't share. There were several player made surveys at the time of people rating the sets by sturdiness and by how "good" they were and WP was at the top and Invul was consistantly at the bottom. I called WP Castle's pet because it clearly was. The first new power set in a long time and it was untouchable for a time.



I never made that claim. I said I was very vocal about it the set getting a buff, was flamed for it hard, the set eventually got a buff and now the people who flamed me don't seem to see a problem that it got buffed.



And yet Castle has stated similar reasons being the motivation behind recent buffs to Defenders and Dominators. He's even admitted at the 6th anniversary event that he is concerned about Brutes v. Tankers in GR.

Concerned enough to do something about it? And to which AT? He didn't say further. I'm interested to see what happens, however.



Actually, I used the expression for Tankers themselves, not the people who play them. I think it's a fitting description because they lack the offensive capabilities of their comic counterparts and are relegated to a role of being decoys by running around, grunting with the Taunt power and grabbing aggro. Very much like a rodeo clown instead of a super hero.
Actually, you referred to many posters as "aggro-monkeys" simply because they disagreed that tanks needed more damage and wanted to see an inherent that better let them mitigate damage. As for why people flamed you, because the suggestions you made were grossly unbalanced (see the offensive stance one above) and usually with little to no regard to AT balance.


"the reason there are so many sarcastic pvpers is we already had a better version of pvp taken away from us to appease bad players. Back then we chuckled at how bad players came here and whined. If we knew that was the actual voice devs would listen to instead of informed, educated players we probably would have been bigger dicks back then." -ConFlict

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
relegated to a role of being decoys by running around, grunting with the Taunt power and grabbing aggro. Very much like a rodeo clown instead of a super hero
Y'know, I almost missed you.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dersk View Post
Y'know, I almost missed you.
Almost? Your aim is not nearly that good.



.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
Actually, I used the expression for Tankers themselves, not the people who play them. I think it's a fitting description because they lack the offensive capabilities of their comic counterparts and are relegated to a role of being decoys by running around, grunting with the Taunt power and grabbing aggro. Very much like a rodeo clown instead of a super hero.
I can't make a complete judgement of you, cos I've not seen many of your posts (I tend to stay out of the tanker forum), but this quote hints to me that your problem with the game is mainly that it's a MMO first and a superhero game second. I've noticed Ultimo_ seeming to have a similar attitude in the past (his inability to create a suitable Iron Man clone for example). Not that it's necessarily a bad attitude to have, but it's one that will lead to disappointment...


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reiraku View Post
Well, in a way, you were. When suggesting a change for defenders, one has to look at defenders as a whole.
I was, and do. My comments are always general in nature. I only present numbers when certain people demand them because I know that specific example will become the fixation and the general principle will be lost.

Quote:
In the majority of in-game situations, defenders are one of the most powerful AT's around due to their force multiplying capabilities in teams.
Only on teams. Solo, they're the weakest (in general).

Quote:
Even from a solo standpoint, they're still capable of things other AT's couldn't dream of. It's only in a small number of cases that they struggle, and that's where the problem lay.
OF course, this is why they made a change to the class, because it wasn't underperforming? Really now.

Quote:
How do you make defenders better without changing their overpowering nature on teams? A number of people would like to see them solo better/faster (myself included), but I never would have given them more damage. The fix the devs made was brilliant in its simplicity, and one I don't recall ever seeing posted.
What? Givig them a boost to damage wan't mentioned? Hmmmm, I seem to ecall suggesting that exact thing myself. Of course, I didn't specify how, I was pointing aout a general principle again.

Quote:
Why people react to you the way they do? Well, you've posted anecdotal evidence with VERY questionable numbers and results that no one else can come close to replicating. You're either lying, crazy, dumb, or have the only bugged game client out of a hundred other people. When it happens several times over different issues, people tend to remember. (as we've seen.)
Not really. People react to me the way I do because I refuse to capitulate at the first sign of resistance. They tell me the things I saw happening with my own eyes didn't happen, and are then offended when I refuse to accept that assertion.

As I said above, I generally don't post numbers because my comments are usually very general in nature, and because I don't pretend to have the expertise in the mechanics of the game I would need. I only present numbers when they are demanded of me. The usual result is that the example becomes the fixation of the thread and the general point I was making is lost. I suspect sometimes that is the reason people demand the numbers.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhroX View Post
I can't make a complete judgement of you, cos I've not seen many of your posts (I tend to stay out of the tanker forum), but this quote hints to me that your problem with the game is mainly that it's a MMO first and a superhero game second. I've noticed Ultimo_ seeming to have a similar attitude in the past (his inability to create a suitable Iron Man clone for example). Not that it's necessarily a bad attitude to have, but it's one that will lead to disappointment...
Actually, this touches on one of my biggest complaints about the game. There's just not enough "comic book" in this comic book game. At this point I don't see how it can change in any significant way without a radical overhaul, so I wouldn't hold my breath for that. However, if I see a way the game might be tweaked to improve the comic book experience, I'll usually mention it. You never know what's possible until you try.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhroX View Post
I can't make a complete judgement of you, cos I've not seen many of your posts (I tend to stay out of the tanker forum), but this quote hints to me that your problem with the game is mainly that it's a MMO first and a superhero game second. I've noticed Ultimo_ seeming to have a similar attitude in the past (his inability to create a suitable Iron Man clone for example). Not that it's necessarily a bad attitude to have, but it's one that will lead to disappointment...
That's a fair observation to make.

I've posted some thoughts on the subject in this thread:

http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=224134

Post #57 and later in #73 responding to some things Arcanaville replied with.


.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimo_ View Post
Actually, this touches on one of my biggest complaints about the game. There's just not enough "comic book" in this comic book game. At this point I don't see how it can change in any significant way without a radical overhaul, so I wouldn't hold my breath for that. However, if I see a way the game might be tweaked to improve the comic book experience, I'll usually mention it. You never know what's possible until you try.
I though so

For me it's the opposite. I couldn't really care what the source material is. I play Co* cos it's the best designed MMO I've ever come across (that's not to say there's no flaws, but that the core design principles are so far above EQ, WoW and their various ripoffs).


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimo_ View Post
They tell me the things I saw happening with my own eyes didn't happen, and are then offended when I refuse to accept that assertion.
Actually, what happens is they demonstrate that you absolutely could not have seen what you claimed, and then rightly call you a liar when you maintain that you saw it anyway, in defiance of game mechanics, math and objective facts about the game. Like the time you claimed that bosses were all resistant to Force Bolt, or the time you claimed that you ran out of end fighting a white con no-resist minion, or the time you claimed Snow Storm scattered mobs, or the time you claimed that the only power that a solo emp/elec had for mitigation was Tesla Cage.

People see through your attempts to bolster your weak arguments with lies about what you've seen in game, Ultimo_. You're not fooling anyone, no matter how loudly you claim the impossible. When you have to make things up out of whole cloth to support your points, you've lost.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimo_ View Post
Actually, this touches on one of my biggest complaints about the game. There's just not enough "comic book" in this comic book game. At this point I don't see how it can change in any significant way without a radical overhaul, so I wouldn't hold my breath for that. However, if I see a way the game might be tweaked to improve the comic book experience, I'll usually mention it. You never know what's possible until you try.
Ok I guess that I will be the first to say it, since I am confused by this comment.

How do you define a better "Comic Book Experience" ?

I am not trolling you here Ultimo, Just uncertain what you meant by this ?


BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimo_ View Post

Only on teams. Solo, they're the weakest (in general).
They still solo better than a number of ATs out there as a whole. I would put them above tanks (barely) on a SO comparison if one took all sets into account.

Quote:
OF course, this is why they made a change to the class, because it wasn't underperforming? Really now.
Actually, yes. They change mechanics that aren't underperforming regularly. Going back to Invuln, Castle stated that it was a bit lopsided, but was over all fine. Then it got the buffs it did. Compared to say, Firey Aura, which was underperforming and didn't receive nearly the amount of love Invuln did. It just happened to be Defenders' turn at getting looked at.

Quote:
What? Givig them a boost to damage wan't mentioned? Hmmmm, I seem to ecall suggesting that exact thing myself. Of course, I didn't specify how, I was pointing aout a general principle again.
A solo damage boost (not to be confused with mod increase) that scaled down per teammate wasn't mentioned, and particularly by you. If you had done so, please link me to the post and I'll gladly stand corrected. That's the difference between the two ideas. Your suggestion of a mod increase would make an extremely powerful team AT even more powerful (and some would say more overpowered). The scaling damage buff helps solo cases, but doesn't change top end performance (such as kins) or their team ability.


Quote:
Not really. People react to me the way I do because I refuse to capitulate at the first sign of resistance. They tell me the things I saw happening with my own eyes didn't happen, and are then offended when I refuse to accept that assertion.

As I said above, I generally don't post numbers because my comments are usually very general in nature, and because I don't pretend to have the expertise in the mechanics of the game I would need. I only present numbers when they are demanded of me. The usual result is that the example becomes the fixation of the thread and the general point I was making is lost. I suspect sometimes that is the reason people demand the numbers.
Well, when you say things are happening that by the game mechanics, numbers, outside experience/recreation couldn't be happening, then refuse to state exactly how, people are going to tell you that you're lying. If there's a problem, stating the numbers in your experiences shows exactly where that problem is. Either via build choices or through balance mechanics. Telling a dozen people that you're right without a shred of proof when they can claim and show how you're wrong doesn't work very well, as you've experienced.


"the reason there are so many sarcastic pvpers is we already had a better version of pvp taken away from us to appease bad players. Back then we chuckled at how bad players came here and whined. If we knew that was the actual voice devs would listen to instead of informed, educated players we probably would have been bigger dicks back then." -ConFlict

 

Posted

Y'know, I figured by staying clear of the Tanker forums I'd be able to avoid a dose of JB but here he is going into other sections and posting the same stupid stuff and then calling himself a martyr.

Also, lol @ Ultimo claiming the Defender inherent buff happened because Defenders were underpowered. It's kind of like claiming pre-buff Stalkers, Khelds, or Dominators were underpowered, or old Defiance was underpowered (hint: none of those were). Look at the Stalker, Kheld, Dom, Defiance, and now Vigilance changes and there is one thing in common: damage increase. Apparently, the key to making things appealing lately is MOAR DAMAGE - so I guess, in a sad sort of way, that any eventual solution to "fixing" Tankers (which don't need looking at as a whole, by the way), will be a damage buff of some sort, because apparently being unable to die in 99% of situations in this game isn't enough.


@macskull, @Not Mac | XBL: macskull | Steam: macskull | Skype: macskull
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."

 

Posted

Well, pre-buff stalkers were pretty dang overshadowed in nearly every gameplay situation by brutes, but that's just the one AT I had the most experience with. In that case, MOAR DAMAGE seemed like a good call since that's what stalkers were primarily all about.

Now if they gave them an innate taunt effect to their attacks and double mez/debuff duration from Hide, then I'd have to facepalm.


"the reason there are so many sarcastic pvpers is we already had a better version of pvp taken away from us to appease bad players. Back then we chuckled at how bad players came here and whined. If we knew that was the actual voice devs would listen to instead of informed, educated players we probably would have been bigger dicks back then." -ConFlict

 

Posted

At the same time, I want to disagree with you, Mac, about the Dominators. The Dominator's change was in need of fixing them in their usefulness against PTOD - basically, even solo, the dominator couldn't kill an EB quick enough with inspirations to keep 'em alive. The solution was not 'just moar damage,' especially since it had to deal with a commonly accepted exploit being so common as to become 'the norm.'


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
Actually, I used the expression for Tankers themselves, not the people who play them.
Perhapes you didnt' call them "Agro Monkies" But you did characterise people who didnt agree with your stance on tankers as "Broken". Which, pro-tip; is pretty dam insulting.


 

Posted

Back to the actual, as stated topic. I pulled this quote out of an old thread about pre-20 endurance, and I stand by it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendix View Post
The early levels of most RPGs (PnP, Single Player and; MMO) have to strike an important balance between 'Suk' and; 'Awesome' or 'Suk' and; 'Fun'. A low level character has to feel like he both is haveing fun, but could be having more fun if certain things were different, for instance if he were doing more damage, hitting more often, or being better at taking hits, that way he will feel compelled to strive for the higher levels where he will (presumably) have those things. If the game were as 'instantly' as fun as the player could imagine it being, he will likley not feel as compelled to play it will lack any relevant/tanigable reward to complement the 'fun'. Concenquently he will be further likley to be drawn away buy other games (or passtimes) that do induce a compulsion to play.

The very existance of this disscussion is evidence of the game being very successful in inducing in the player a need for certain things, in this case, better 'End Managment'. Feeling that 'End Managment at the low levels sucks' is not only understandable, but INTENDED. It is suppose to make you want to get to a higher level where you have access to many more better and; varried 'End Managment' tools.
The Dev's, IF they are significantly conserened with the endurance issues faced by new and low level (and bad?) players are most likley not going to do any global adjustments to End Consumption. (that would not be keeping with the posted philosphy above) Rather they would be trying to increase and diversify players End-Consumption-Mitigation options. Which, largely, is the tatic they appear to have embraced over the years. End Increasing accolades, IOs with +recovery, insperation combining, and, most recently, Recovery Serum (dayum, that's some awesome temp).


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talen Lee View Post
At the same time, I want to disagree with you, Mac, about the Dominators. The Dominator's change was in need of fixing them in their usefulness against PTOD - basically, even solo, the dominator couldn't kill an EB quick enough with inspirations to keep 'em alive. The solution was not 'just moar damage,' especially since it had to deal with a commonly accepted exploit being so common as to become 'the norm.'
Talen pretty much nailed it about Dominators. I remember when the change was announced, people were begging Castle to not touch perma-Dom as that was the only thing that made the AT "playable". Castle's response was that that perception was why he was looking at Dom's in the first place. Smart man.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhroX View Post
I though so

For me it's the opposite. I couldn't really care what the source material is. I play Co* cos it's the best designed MMO I've ever come across (that's not to say there's no flaws, but that the core design principles are so far above EQ, WoW and their various ripoffs).
I agree, up to a point. It does many things very well. If it didn't I wouldn't have been here as long as I have, and I wouldn't care to suggest what I see as improvements.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendix View Post
Perhapes you didnt' call them "Agro Monkies" But you did characterise people who didnt agree with your stance on tankers as "Broken". Which, pro-tip; is pretty dam insulting.
Broken like you 'break' a horse? Yep.

Many people were expressing the sentiment that they wished Tankers were more like they are in comics, but that they didn't expect that to change in this game. They were also unwilling to fight for what they wanted, or work for a better compromise, and so just rolled over and accepted what they got. To me, that's the definition of someone who has been broken.


.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biospark View Post
Ok I guess that I will be the first to say it, since I am confused by this comment.

How do you define a better "Comic Book Experience" ?

I am not trolling you here Ultimo, Just uncertain what you meant by this ?
What I mean is that the game just falls short of replicating what we see in the comic books.

Consider Batman, one of the most significant, iconic characters in comic book history. He's been copied many times over the years, generating characters like Moon Knight, Nightwing and so on. City of Heroes simply can't emulate him or his adventures.

Everything is about beating up bad guys, and not the type we see in the comics. Batman adventures tend to include some intrigue and mystery. CoH doesn't bring in any of this.

Actually, here's another great example, one that's actually in the game.

A building is on fire. How CoH deals with this is very different from what we'd see in a comic book.

In the comics, the hero will rush into the burning buildng, dodging burning rafters, sudden sinkholes and walls of flame to rescue the child trapped within. Outside, his teammates are trying to combat the actual fire, rescuing people from the upper story windows.

In City of Heroes, we beat up an army of bad guys, then we beat up the fire. Then we beat up more bad guys.

In the comics, we see car chases, death traps, secret IDs, and all sorts of other stuff that CoH is just missing or falling short of.

In the comics, Spidermand spends most of his time fighting Electro, not an army of nameless, faceless goons, only to find Electro is 40 times as powerful as Spidey is.


As I say, though, the game doesn't fail, it's pretty good, for what it does do. I'd just like to see them fill in some of the gaps. If DC Online has the kinds of things that make it a Comic Book MMO instead of an MMO with comic book flavouring, then CoH may be in trouble.


 

Posted

Wanting CoX to be more like a comic book, that there is the crux of the problem. You want the game to be something it's not, and then bring up perceived issues with the game because that's "not how they do it in the comic books." We have endurance because it's part of how most MMOs operate, because we need some type of limiter. Otherwise we would just wait for our powers to recharge and spam them indefinitely. Likewise, there's problem a good reason why we can't perfectly recreate comic book heroes.

They'd be overpowered. If you could make a character that has offense and defense of Superman, that would certainly not be balanced.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goshnova View Post
Wanting CoX to be more like a comic book, that there is the crux of the problem. You want the game to be something it's not, and then bring up perceived issues with the game because that's "not how they do it in the comic books." We have endurance because it's part of how most MMOs operate, because we need some type of limiter. Otherwise we would just wait for our powers to recharge and spam them indefinitely. Likewise, there's problem a good reason why we can't perfectly recreate comic book heroes.

They'd be overpowered. If you could make a character that has offense and defense of Superman, that would certainly not be balanced.
Wanting CoX to be more like a comic book, is not a problem. It's how CoH sold itself.

As for offense & defense, I think where that comes into play is Scrappers really. Other ATs can come close...but they lack of mez protection or rather that chaining of mez effects is likely what kills it for some people.


BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goshnova View Post
Wanting CoX to be more like a comic book, that there is the crux of the problem. You want the game to be something it's not, and then bring up perceived issues with the game because that's "not how they do it in the comic books." We have endurance because it's part of how most MMOs operate, because we need some type of limiter. Otherwise we would just wait for our powers to recharge and spam them indefinitely. Likewise, there's problem a good reason why we can't perfectly recreate comic book heroes.

They'd be overpowered. If you could make a character that has offense and defense of Superman, that would certainly not be balanced.
It's not the actual power levels that matter, though. It's about presentation. My Super Strength Tanker doesn't feel particularly Super Strong, but it's not because he does comparatively lower damage. It's because he's not doing things that strong characters can do, like lifting a car full of thugs and smashing it on a rock, or holding up a falling building or train track. Again, this is just one example, but it's not about the numbers, it's about the presentation.

I realize I'm looking for the game to be something it isn't. It can't possibly meet all my desires, but there are places where it might be tweaked so it's closer to what I'd like. For my part, I think it would be good for the game in general to be more like a comic book. Not exactly like, just MORE like.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandX View Post
Wanting CoX to be more like a comic book, is not a problem. It's how CoH sold itself.
It's also how they continue to sell it. See the Prelude to Going Rogue ViDoc.

The problem is their ad pitch is a half truth.

The game conforms to MMORPG conventions at the expense of comic book concepts and ideals. It doesn't use MMO funtionality to support the chosen genre, but rather they try to force the ideals of traditional MMORPGs into the genre.

The result is not "a comic book inserted into a MMO" as they maintain, but a MMORPG with some comic book window dressing.



.


 

Posted

Quote:
You know your deck is good when people moan every time you bust it out.
That's what she said.

Quote:
I was the one getting flamed and trolled
Of course, JB, there's more to it than that.

Quote:
they continue the hostility to myself and others.
You should know why.

Quote:
I got flamed
You deserved it.

Quote:
proposing buffs to Invulnerability.
I like how you don't go into detail on what the buffs were.