Failure of the Developers to Implement Changes.
By
Aett_Thorn,
Posted on: 2010-06-04 20:02 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
Quote:
I am not really disagreeing with your main point but I thought I would note that the above comment is one of the reasons there IS so much wailing and teeth gnashing at the slightest change - most folks even on the boards don't fully understand the impact of the changes. The reason I say this is that the domination change did NOT nerf permadom - in fact, it gave it a slight damage boost in most cases (like, 5%-10% depending on powerset) and a HUGE damage boost if you have some outside source of damage enhancement since the change was to move the damage enhancement that used to be in domination into the AT's base modifier. Since all damage modifiers multiply the base damage this means that a dom's max damage potential is actually HIGHER than it was before. The only nerf was to the few folks who had so much recharge that they had domination double or triple stacked - in this case they could no longer get a huge damage bonus from just domination but would now have to rely on outside buffs. (Which are now more effective - so the top performance of dom's is STILL higher than it was before it just isn't attainable solo).
|
Originally Posted by Lightfoot
Another case in point would be the Dominator buff. Permadom was nerfed, while damage was increased across the board resulting in Doms whose damage output matched, or in some cases exceeded, their performance while in Domination mode. There were violent threats of ragequits all over the place, and there are still people complaining about the buff to this day (including the uninformed people like yourselves who only listen to the malcontents rather than finding out firsthand).
|
Globals: @Midnight Mystique/@Magik13
Quote:
I remember watching a customer service video at an old job maybe 10 years ago. The guy gave this story/example:|
Originally Posted by New_Dark_Age
I see your point but I believe that by taking greater risk the lesser evil is chosen. It is better a set be buffed too much then quickly nerfed than letting a set rot for several years. The end result would be the same only faster. Discontent exists no matter what you do.
|
There was a candyshop with two men working at it. You placed your order and one of them would get you your candy.
One man would put your bag on the scale, pour a bunch in, then take away until he got your order filled.
The other man would put your bag on the scale, put in some, then add until he got your order filled.
The second man was the one that customers liked to fill their order, even though both men were equally accurate and reliable in getting your order filled.
I can certainly understand wanting things to go faster, but repeated buffing over a long period of time is something that is better tolerated (and gives a better sense of stability) than radical changes back and forth, especially when its a massive buff that keeps having to get nerfed and nerfed and nerfed.
edit: I understand completely if you disagree with this. Just sayin' where I'm coming from and what I believe.
Quote:
I prefer the first guy, because when I ask for a half pound of candy, when he gets down to .6 or so I'm liable to say that's close enough and end up with slightly more candy. Accuracy and reliability are fine and dandy, but more candy is better.
|
Originally Posted by Psyte
I remember watching a customer service video at an old job maybe 10 years ago. The guy gave this story/example:
There was a candyshop with two men working at it. You placed your order and one of them would get you your candy. One man would put your bag on the scale, pour a bunch in, then take away until he got your order filled. The other man would put your bag on the scale, put in some, then add until he got your order filled. The second man was the one that customers liked to fill their order, even though both men were equally accurate and reliable in getting your order filled. |
Goodbye may seem forever
Farewell is like the end
But in my heart's the memory
And there you'll always be
-- The Fox and the Hound
Quote:
The masses disagree though. Even if the end result is the same, it's the perception that matters. In the candy store example, people perceive they are getting stiffed when he takes candy out of the bag. They think their getting a bonus when it's added.
|
Originally Posted by Tenzhi
I prefer the first guy, because when I ask for a half pound of candy, when he gets down to .6 or so I'm liable to say that's close enough and end up with slightly more candy. Accuracy and reliability are fine and dandy, but more candy is better.
|
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern." Lord Acton
Madam Enigma's History
Quote:
Interesting story about perception but if you want it to relate a little more on topic you should also mention that the second man would take 3 times longer to fill a person's order and that the first man tended to accurately guess the correct measurement at times.
|
Originally Posted by Psyte
I remember watching a customer service video at an old job maybe 10 years ago. The guy gave this story/example:
There was a candyshop with two men working at it. You placed your order and one of them would get you your candy. One man would put your bag on the scale, pour a bunch in, then take away until he got your order filled. The other man would put your bag on the scale, put in some, then add until he got your order filled. The second man was the one that customers liked to fill their order, even though both men were equally accurate and reliable in getting your order filled. I can certainly understand wanting things to go faster, but repeated buffing over a long period of time is something that is better tolerated (and gives a better sense of stability) than radical changes back and forth, especially when its a massive buff that keeps having to get nerfed and nerfed and nerfed. edit: I understand completely if you disagree with this. Just sayin' where I'm coming from and what I believe. |
Quote:
Not necessarily. Pour in and slowly add. Better than pouring, taking out, waiting for the scale to settle down, take more out, etc. And of course, the first guy might take out too much while adjusting and have to put more in to try and get it right.|
Originally Posted by New_Dark_Age
Interesting story but if you want it to relate a little more on topic you should also mention that the second man would take 3 times longer to fill a person's order.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Madam_Enigma
The masses disagree though. Even if the end result is the same, it's the perception that matters. In the candy store example, people perceive they are getting stiffed when he takes candy out of the bag. They think their getting a bonus when it's added.
|
More directly on topic?
1st approach: way over do it, wait to see the effects of that. In the meantime players WILL get used to the overpowered status. When it gets nerfed, the players will protest bitterly. They've developed playstyles and builds around it and how it works in an overpowered fashion. They've told other players, "Hey, do it this way! Its awesome!" or even worse (which happened to me pre-ED), "Do it this way or you're stupid! This is the way things are supposed to be!"
Also, there's no telling how long that will take or how many times they'll have to do it to get it right. They might be aware of the problem of something being overpowered, but that doesn't mean they'll get to adjusting/fixing it immediately. The longer it remains overpowered, the more it becomes "normal," the worse the reaction will be when it comes. And of course, the folks who realized it was overpowered and said as much will come back with "I told you so!" making things an even bigger mess.
I think the BotZ nerf might be a good example. And I'm sure other folks can think of things that had to be adjusted downward multiple times along with the playerbase's reaction to it. I think it is fair to point out that most players don't care if something is overpowered "in their favor." Of course, what the long-term effects of that imbalance might be or how it might affect other things might not be on their mind, either.
2nd approach: Yes, it takes will take longer for the devs. Like above, there's usually something that comes before something gets buffed on the ol' priority list. But its a smarter way to do it. It still ruffles feathers because "its not fast enough" but at the same time nobody actually gets hurt by the adjustment since its a buff (caveat: provided its just a buff and there's no buff-with-tradeoff going on). There's no anxiety concerning "will my power/powersets get nerfed yet again?" when new patchnotes come out. And since the adjustment is gradual versus radical swings back and forth, its generally more stable so its easier/safer to plan around, I think.
With defenders change of inherant its sparked an idea that might make a tanker worth playing more.
When in a team, give tankers the gauntlet ability, increasing there taunt with every attack like is currently active, but solo give them a boost in another area like endurence usage similar to defenders inherant.
We all know that tankers can be a real pain to run unless your a specific build type because of all the toggles you have to run, particularly under level 20 because of endurence and solo there powers drain loads of endurence as well on top of toggles.
Sets and stuff do reduce it a lot but if tankers are the defencive option why not give them defencive help compared to scrappers damage boost?
I disagree however with the OPs suggestion of -tohit because that would just be a bonus to dark melee and make shield or ice + dark melee the new fotm build. Endurence reduction would benefit all tankers.
Oh, another reason to take time? Less time wasted trying to fix the problems caused when things were rushed. For example, I wish the AE started off with lower rewards, with rewards progressively going up as it got fixed up, exploits plugged, etc. I'm really not fond of "there's a problem!" with a blanket solution put into place while a better/more elegant one is worked on. I understand it, I can deal with it, but I'm not thrilled with it, you know?
"OMG its underwhelming! Fix it!"
"OMG its broken as hell! Nerf it!"
"Still broken! Nerf it again!"
"Still broken as hell! Nerf it again!"
"Dammit! Its still broken! Nerf it hard!"
"AAARG! We cut to the bone! Too much! Buff it!"
"Okay, finally. Its fine as-is."
All the while the players are getting more and more pissed at the constant nerfings, and will remember all that long after the power finally gets to a good spot (but will always pale to "the glory days," to "when it was a good power," to "when they had it 'right'").
Seriously; if you went to a restaurant where you constantly had to send your food back you're not going to be too thrilled with it, even when they get it right. And you're not going to be so quick to recommend it to friends. Now, I realize that applies to taking a long time on things too, but I know which one I consider the lesser of two evils.
Quote:
Slightly twisted idea that come to mind concerning Vigilance; why not give Tanks a damage bonus based on how much endurance they're currently burning up? The more toggles you have, the more often you attack, the more endurance you're spending and the higher the damage buff. Granted, there needs to be a limit to the bonus offered lest builds be made that are expressly end-use heavy and the set used can get itself an unfair advantage (Willpower + Fitness/Stamina loaded with tons of extra toggles could be obscene).|
Originally Posted by Sunstormer
With defenders change of inherant its sparked an idea that might make a tanker worth playing more.
|
Directly related to your post: How about -Res (all types) on enemies within a certain radius of the Tank, causing them to take more damage from a tank's attacks? Just make it go down on teams like the new Vigilance. Or would that get out of hand/abused too quickly?
And a Secondary Critical might be interesting, sort of like an Overpower. Get a SC and whatever your secondary effect does? It does double. Of course, that would make knockback sets super annoying
no
Quote:
You might not remember, but none of the Hero ATs were designed with Inherents in mind.|
Originally Posted by New_Dark_Age
Is it hard for you to grasp that the more Archtypes that have an inherent that increases personal effectiveness would only help my case, however small. ? Wise up.
|
However, the Villain ATs were designed around their Inherents. That's one reason why the Hero Inherents feel tacked on. At least that's the way I feel about it. The only hero AT, I feel, that could have used an Inherent was the Blaster.
In fact, my personal opinion is that of the Hero ATs, the only ones that really got Inherents were the Blasters, Controllers and Defenders.
The Tanks already had "Gauntlet" and the Scrappers already had the Critical Hits before Inherents every came out. Not a single thing change for them with the introduction of the Inherents. Except, of course, for the Inherent Icon among all the Powers effects Icons.
Why change something if it doesn't need to be changed?
Oh, and Dominators do, indeed, play differently than they used to. Give it a whirl before dismissing them with outdated observations.
There I was between a rock and a hard place. Then I thought, "What am I doing on this side of the rock?"
Quote:
Scrappers did not always have Critical, and in fact Critical was the first of the Inherents, it just was not called as such. Likewise, Tankers had a Gauntlet-like effect that multiplied the threat of the damage they did, but Gauntlet specifically expanded that effect to an AoE around the target. In other words, Tankers originally had the "pokevoke" that Brutes now have. |
Originally Posted by Twisted Toon
The Tanks already had "Gauntlet" and the Scrappers already had the Critical Hits before Inherents every came out.
|
Around the time Gauntlet was developed, what later came to be Fury was discussed as an Inherent for Tankers. It turned out to be too powerful, and thus Brutes have lower HP and defenses than Tankers. (Although personally I think a lesser version of Fury wouldn't have been overpowered, perhaps giving around a 10% boost to damage, much as Tankers have now compared to at release)
Just to bring up memories of the "good old days", at release Tankers had a Taunt power that hit a single target, drew aggro with their attacks only on the target hit, and had about twice the defensive stats they currently do. Plus no ED, so twice that again if you six slotted. It was considered a necessity to take Provoke from the Power Pool in order to successfully tank.
I'm honestly not sure about taunt auras, although I would guess they were there.
ENERGY MELEE
Quote:
I can't stand the Energy Transfer animation also. I don't care about more AoE damage, but I would like the old single-hand animation back with the very fast animation time. Retain the long animation and double-hand pattycake for PvP, that's fine with me.| Energy Melee currently suffers from dismal AOE performance while no longer having an edge in single target damage since the weakening of Energy Transfer. Other attacks sets can match Energy Melee in single target damage but all have better AOE capabilities. This makes the set without reason to exist as other choices are more logical for overall effectiveness. |
NO REAL TANKER INHERENT
Quote:
| One suggestion I have made is for every attack a tanker makes , he has a chance of landing a Accuracy Debuff and a Damage Debuff in a small AOE around his target. It should be both so it can help both defense and resistance characters equally. |
Goldbrick 50 inv/ss tank
Other 50s: Power Beam, Rocky Mantle, STORMIE Agent, Matchless, Major Will, Knightmayor, Femstone, Space Maureen, Crimebuster Ako, Dr. Twilight, Doc Champion, American Gold Eagle
I have to agree with the OP.
While this game is great in many areas, and I've always admired the "polished" feel on any graphical development, whether it is when they first introduced capes, when they added the "ultra" mode or when they have added the amazing new animations which are smooth and realistic.
However, the problem I have always had with this game is the almost amateurish way they handle the numbers and mathematics behind the scenes. It is a shame that the game gets let down in this way. I'm afraid whenever I read what the devs write on the forum it always comes across like a team of modders, working on someone elses game and still trying to figure out how it works.
"Hey guys I just figured out power X works in such and such way! I'll put a quick fix in the next patch." Sure, it would be okay occasionally, but where is the damn VISION? What about saying at a Dev meeting: "Okay guys, we are going to do a serious review of all the Buff/Debuff powersets, make sure the numbers are right and update any old powers which were designed 6 yrs ago and are still crap." I mean.. where. is. it. Why does this never happen? *sigh*
Quote:
We had "Vision" back in the early days. It sucked. The game has gotten a hell of a lot better since the people (well, person) with Vision left....
|
Originally Posted by Peacemoon
but where is the damn VISION?
|
Quote:
Probably because the codebase is held together with baling wire and twine, and the fact that this MMO was developed by a small team of MMO n00bs probably more than 10 years ago.|
Originally Posted by Peacemoon
However, the problem I have always had with this game is the almost amateurish way they handle the numbers and mathematics behind the scenes. It is a shame that the game gets let down in this way. I'm afraid whenever I read what the devs write on the forum it always comes across like a team of modders, working on someone elses game and still trying to figure out how it works.
"Hey guys I just figured out power X works in such and such way! I'll put a quick fix in the next patch." Sure, it would be okay occasionally, but where is the damn VISION? What about saying at a Dev meeting: "Okay guys, we are going to do a serious review of all the Buff/Debuff powersets, make sure the numbers are right and update any old powers which were designed 6 yrs ago and are still crap." I mean.. where. is. it. Why does this never happen? *sigh* |
Articles from 2001:
http://www.escmag.com/features/cityofheroes_int.cfm
http://rpgvaultarchive.ign.com/featu...ofheroes.shtml
Arcana can give a lot more insight than I can about the mechanics and sometimes poor implementation and the history behind it but suffice it to say that odds are the devs aren't sitting in their office every day doing a lot of nothing.
If you've ever seen a small underfunded team working under the gun to put out a product, you'll pretty much realize that it is near impossible for that kind of structure to put out quality, maintainable code with documentation. The fact that this game ever got published and popular at all is an achievement in itself.
At this point the guys coming into the company are trying to clean up and maintain the system while trying to improve things without seriously messing up 6 years of player experiences. This is probably the reason why it's difficult to implement the changes to the system and why the devs are pretty reluctant to update things wholesale (still trying to figure out i13 PvP changes though).
You have every right to complain about how things are working or not working, but the people who are in the trenches slaving away aren't at fault for it. If you're going to blame anyone you should blame management.
Quote:
Pretty much this. The failure rate on software projects--especially MMO software projects--is extremely high. While some of the underlying code is not ideal, the fact that it ever was released sets it apart from other MMO projects out there. That it's still in use this many years later is probably a shock to everyone who was originally involved. It's been 10 or 12 years since the graphical MMO "explosion" and we've seen maybe thirty commercially viable products in the United States that lasted more than two years, and only about ten that were major, genre-defining hits. Of course, there are text games out there like Gemstone III that have been out there nearly 20 years, but in the graphic world CoX is a rare beast.
| The fact that this game ever got published and popular at all is an achievement in itself. |
Another case in point would be the Dominator buff. Permadom was nerfed, while damage was increased across the board resulting in Doms whose damage output matched, or in some cases exceeded, their performance while in Domination mode. There were violent threats of ragequits all over the place, and there are still people complaining about the buff to this day (including the uninformed people like yourselves who only listen to the malcontents rather than finding out firsthand).
Since it will take a minimum of two months to assess and correct any overbuff, plenty of folks will have time to get used to the now overperforming set, which will result in just as much whining and lots more rage than if they gradually buff sets and powers over time.
New story arcs coming soon (ARC IDs will be aded when I finish the arc):
So, you want to join the Hellions? (level 1-14 Villainous arc)
Sparks & Steel (level 5-20 Heroic arc)
and
So you want to join the Skulls? (level 1-14 Villainous arc)