Elite Bosses and Arch-Villains in Dark Astoria
By
Agent White,
Posted on: 2012-03-09 22:13 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Good thing it's not all about how you see things then, Arcana.
Different viewpoints are the best way to move interesting content forward.
"The Hollows was a cover up; it was really caused by Blue Steel experimenting with Foot Stomp." - Steelclaw
<-- boy
Quote:
I would be interested to hear your viewpoint that explains how knowing its not impossible helps you in any way. Virtually no player request is literally impossible.|
Originally Posted by _Psi_
Good thing it's not all about how you see things then, Arcana.
Different viewpoints are the best way to move interesting content forward. |
You could start by actually using the information I said was not particularly useful. The answer to your question is no, its not impossible. Please demonstrate how that knowledge actually helps.
[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.)
You'll have to forgive me, but the response you gave me to that sounded condescending, at best.
I fully understand the desire not to alter the existing EBs, but I fail to see the logic in denying an option that in no way effects said EBs.
"The Hollows was a cover up; it was really caused by Blue Steel experimenting with Foot Stomp." - Steelclaw
<-- boy
Well, it looks like the decision has been made. I'm disappointed. Not because I want to solo AVs. That's not my thing. But I am always disappointed when players have their options limited.
And if I can solo the EB and all his friends in the room and so can my teammates then the EB frequently dies before I even see him in the room.
50s: Inv/SS PB Emp/Dark Grav/FF DM/Regen TA/A Sonic/Elec MA/Regen Fire/Kin Sonic/Rad Ice/Kin Crab Fire/Cold NW Merc/Dark Emp/Sonic Rad/Psy Emp/Ice WP/DB FA/SM
Overlord of Dream Team and Nightmare Squad
Quote:
Most? Really? I have 13 (15? bah, I forget) 50s, most of which are specced with IOs. I have never defeated an AV. Ok, maybe not never, there were some before the EB downgrade was implemented that I had to level way past to defeat. But none in the past six years or so.|
Originally Posted by Lucky666
Is this really such a huge request? I mean really most people that get incarnates get set bonuses and can solo AVs. Just give the people what they want paragon you've been so good about it in the past.
|
I felt very lucky to manage to beat Keres, Rommy and their posse of monstrous bodyguards on my Ice/Time. That's WITH Cimeroran help, which isn't as robust as one might think (I finished with just the Doctor and a PPD radio backup surviving). Oh, and thank Statesman's ghost for lava against the 5th.
If she was +3, I'm sure this would be considerably easier. But she's just starting down the incarnate path, so it's not. My initial goal was to work towards filling slots by running the DA content. Of course I've been doing that, and I'm not sure I'm ready to tackle the final arc. So...I've been resorting to running some BAFs for components (and will probably run some of the early arcs in Oro).
Suggestions:
Super Packs Done Right
Influence Sink: IO Level Mod/Recrafting
Random Merit Rolls: Scale cost by Toon Level
Quote:
That does not provide me an answer to my question. In what way specifically does knowing its not impossible help.
|
Originally Posted by _Psi_
You'll have to forgive me, but the response you gave me to that sounded condescending, at best.
I fully understand the desire not to alter the existing EBs, but I fail to see the logic in denying an option that in no way effects said EBs. |
[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.)
Quote:
If it's not impossible, that means it is possible. Since it is possible, it can be done. Since it can be done and Psi wants it done, it should be done.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
That does not provide me an answer to my question. In what way specifically does knowing its not impossible help.
|
QED
50s: Inv/SS PB Emp/Dark Grav/FF DM/Regen TA/A Sonic/Elec MA/Regen Fire/Kin Sonic/Rad Ice/Kin Crab Fire/Cold NW Merc/Dark Emp/Sonic Rad/Psy Emp/Ice WP/DB FA/SM
Overlord of Dream Team and Nightmare Squad
Quote:
I would not want to presume that without direct evidence.
|
Originally Posted by Bionic_Flea
If it's not impossible, that means it is possible. Since it is possible, it can be done. Since it can be done and Psi wants it done, it should be done.
QED |
[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.)
50s: Inv/SS PB Emp/Dark Grav/FF DM/Regen TA/A Sonic/Elec MA/Regen Fire/Kin Sonic/Rad Ice/Kin Crab Fire/Cold NW Merc/Dark Emp/Sonic Rad/Psy Emp/Ice WP/DB FA/SM
Overlord of Dream Team and Nightmare Squad
Quote:
I argue against that the claim that downgraded EBs is actually an issue for any "small team" of more than one character unless they are poorly built characters, even for SOs.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Irrespective of whether it happens in other instances, scaling EBs up has issues. Scaling *upward* always has issues, because things designed to be a particular rank tend to be more intrinsically powerful, separate from the rank scaling. A scaled up EB is weaker than an intrinsically designed AV most of the time. But they award AV-level of rewards. That's not a good idea on its face. Is it worth creating that one problem to solve the alternate problem of the content in DA not scaling to larger or more powerful teams? Not in my opinion because the design intent of DA is to focus on the solo and small team incarnate progress experience. Therefore, solo and small team issues should *always* override teamed ones in essentially all but the most problematic cases. There's no overriding compelling reason to allow the issues associated with scale-up here, so there's no reason to do it. "Because why not" is not a reason, ever, anywhere.
The alternative is to design them to be AVs that scale downward. But that's also problematic because we now have game designers primarily designing the solo and small team path for a completely different target, and then making them scale down hopefully to the right level. And again this violates the design imperative of DA: to serve the solo and small team players and the solo and small team experience. |
Based on the developer response, I am extremely disappointed in our devs for creating a dichotomy in difficulty that did not need to exist and, in my opinion, should have been avoided. That dichotomy is between these two situations.
- "Raid"-sized content in the form of iTrials, which is explicitly designed to be harder than normal content. Everything about iTrials, from the levels of the foes to the special mechanics of the trials, to the simple fact that they are timed, has been repeatedly explained in terms of "end game" content representing a fundamental difficulty break from the 1-50 content preceeding it.
- "Small Team"/solo content. This content, on the basis of the confirmation that DA is Working As Intended, is easier than the rest of the 1-50 game. You face "story bosses" who are EBs almost exclusively instead of the more typical AVs found in the 1-50 game. Facing foes above level 50 is almost entirely optional.
So on a difficulty scale of 1-10, I have a choice between 1 and 11.
I now question the validity of everything that has been used to defend all the exceptional challenge mechanics included in the iTrials. If Dark Astoria is aimed at being gentle on soloists, how is exceptional difficulty (by CoH standards) justified on iTrials?
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
The Devs didn't create the difficulty dichotomy. Players, and the way they want to play, did. There are scads of players that want large teams fighting huge problems that only large teams can solve. They wanted a good reason to be able to gather more than just 8 members of their SG/VG at one time, doing one task. They wanted their purpled-out Warshade to have a challenge in regular missions that normal mission difficulty could not solve.
There are also a ton of players that don't necessarily want a difficult fight at the end, especially if their solo character of choice is more on the support side of the scale. They want options for how hard the fight will be, depending on who they bring to the party. They want max rewards for avoiding all human contact, and not feel singled out because they don't want to team.
Devs are only providing what the players keep asking for. YOU may not be asking for it, but enough people did that democracy prevailed.
Loose --> not tight.
Lose --> Did not win, misplace, cannot find, subtract.
One extra 'o' makes a big difference.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
I now question the validity of everything that has been used to defend all the exceptional challenge mechanics included in the iTrials. If Dark Astoria is aimed at being gentle on soloists, how is exceptional difficulty (by CoH standards) justified on iTrials? |
IMO it's never been justified. That's largely why I dislike the iTrials.
The only reason I see is because the iTrials are designed to be tackled by multiple teams.
Quote:
That's not how the iTrials have been presented.|
Originally Posted by White Hot Flash
Devs are only providing what the players keep asking for. YOU may not be asking for it, but enough people did that democracy prevailed.
|
Edit: Specifically, Incarnate content has been presented as the "end game", and that "end game" content was presented as having different norms. iTrials are a kind of Incarnate content - the kind we got first. Now we get DA, and DA does not meet that standard.
So either Incarnate content and the "end game" are not synonymous as they have been explained up until now, iTrials are not hard because they are Incarnate content, or Dark Astoria is too easy to be Incarnate content. Something doesn't fit the patterns and explanations that have been given previously.
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:
The flood of NPC helpers, lack of timed missions and zero ambushes does kinda make DA "Incanrate lite" - but it's still an awesome zone |
Originally Posted by UberGuy
This content, on the basis of the confirmation that DA is Working As Intended, is easier than the rest of the 1-50 game.
|
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
And Blasters are a lot of fun for a lot of people, but there's a big thread about there being something objectively dysfunctional about them. I'm not arguing that DA sucks, or that it won't appeal to a wide array of people. And I happen to like iTrials. But devs posting that DA's difficulty is basically working as intended immediately slams up against the explanations I have seen for why iTrials are like they are. I want to know either what's wrong with those explanations (or possibly my understanding of them), or why we have a sudden break from what was explained.|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
The flood of NPC helpers, lack of timed missions and zero ambushes does kinda make DA "Incanrate lite" - but it's still an awesome zone
|
Something worth noting - there is very likely a direct relationship between the rewards in DA and the difficulty of the content. The easier the content is, the worse the drop probabilities will likely be, because determined players will find it easy to take advantage of the ease to pursue the best reward rates they can.
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:
I'm kinda puzzled by this statement, because we've done quite a lot of that, actually. This thread clearly shows it's a largely subjective question, so I'm not sure how one could "prove" it in any useful sense, but several people (including myself) in this thread have presented reasons we think the absence of an AV option is detrimental to the DA experience, even for soloists and small teams specifically. At this point, asking "Why not?" is not attempting to shift the burden of proof. I've provided what I think are very good reasons. I'm asking what the reasons to the contrary are, and whether they outweigh the reasons I've provided. Which is again subjective, of course.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I'm compelled to partially agree with J_B on this one, for this reason. The question that is *often* asked about *anything* is "why not." The presumption is that the burden of proof is not on the person asking, but on everyone else to justify why their request should not be satisfied.
|
Dr. Aeon has spoken, so I accept that DA will not get changed now, but I maintain that it should have been done earlier in development when the issues could have been addressed, and that it should be done in similar future content.
Quote:
I appreciate this position quite a bit. It's rare, and as another one of the players the new|
Originally Posted by Dr. Aeon
Hey guys!
We have been reading peoples feedback regarding the EBs in Dark Astoria. Right now, were planning on leaving them the same. The goal of Dark Astoria was to provide challenging content for solo players and small teams; upgrading these EBs to be AVs that scale down, at this point in development, has the risk of causing a number issues that could hamper this experience, which is something we want to avoid. However, we are taking the feedback into consideration for future arcs, so please continue to give us your opinions about this. Thanks! Dr. Aeon |
Dark Astoria small teamer concept was designed for, it'd be bullish of me to not show my
gratitude for it.
I definitly like the EBs where they are, and if changing them to be scaled up/down will mess
with their current difficulty for the worse, I thank you for favoring the small-teamer side
in this.
I do hope in the future, some agreeable way can be found to give other players what
they want too, though. Just because DA was made for "me", doesn't mean I don't want
the large-team loving folk to get a good experience out of it too - they may resent people
like us in an MMO, but the opposite doesn't hold true for me. With luck, you'll find a
good cludge to the system to give both of our sides what we need and want.
Quote:
My problem would be if the EBs are then like other demoted EBs - that is, having AV resistances and purple triangles. I actually like the lack of such things in the DA arcs. Such a change could change things for everyone else.
|
Originally Posted by Doc_Reverend
Far as I can tell, by including AVs as optional (key word: optional, as in not appearing unless we want them to), this strips the solobility of it. Somehow. Maybe it retroactively makes his XP less than my XP. I don't know.
I'm really befuddled as to why anyone would have a problem with optional AVs. |
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
I actually agree with Arcana, who's apparently agreeing with Johnny to some extent. I think the reasons Johnny's giving to shoot this down are ridiculous, but I would prefer something that doesn't mechanically change how I run missions in DA.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
I'll have to agree with Arcana and J_B. If the devs designed DA around solo/small team content, then large teams have to take the back seat in DA. It's the same as soloers having no place in Trial content. Simple as that. I like the content and i find it challenging and fun for my mediocre characters. If you are looking for grounds to reassure your 10 bil inf characters' dominance, go somewhere else.
Freedom: @Negatron T-130
Currently on:
Aenisha - Titan Weapons/Energy Aura Scrapper Redside
--The fatal flaw in every plan is the assumption that you know more than your enemy.--
I understand the problem being presented here, but in a different light than the topic creator.
I soloed the entire DA meta-arc, taking the most difficult choices when possible, on +4/8 with a Fire/Dark Brute. It was a fun and an interesting challenge almost the whole time. But the few times it wasn't was against the solo EBs. Every single one was not just pitifully weak, but weaker than the regular groups I fought to reach them.
I must have died at least 50 times. But against the solo EBs, even if there was more than one, even if it was 54+3, my health never even dropped below 3/4. They could barely hit me, and none of their attacks did more than a scratch. Can that really be working as intended? All they'd need to do is spawn with a group.
Quote:
I now imagine a mission where the build up was all groups of one or two EBs and the end was a large group of Bosses and LTs.
|
Originally Posted by Demon_Shell
I understand the problem being presented here, but in a different light than the topic creator.
I soloed the entire DA meta-arc, taking the most difficult choices when possible, on +4/8 with a Fire/Dark Brute. It was a fun and an interesting challenge almost the whole time. But the few times it wasn't was against the solo EBs. Every single one was not just pitifully weak, but weaker than the regular groups I fought to reach them. I must have died at least 50 times. But against the solo EBs, even if there was more than one, even if it was 54+3, my health never even dropped below 3/4. They could barely hit me, and none of their attacks did more than a scratch. Can that really be working as intended? All they'd need to do is spawn with a group. |
Quote:
Glad you brought that up.|
Originally Posted by LISAR
I now imagine a mission where the build up was all groups of one or two EBs and the end was a large group of Bosses and LTs.
|
Perfect example. Toward the end of the Dream Doctor arc, on the mission where you have to take out the EBs with groups to spawn the "Mother" EB. Regular EBs with groups were real fights, "Mother" EB at the end was just sorry because she was by herself. I couldn't even tell if the mother was supposed to be any harder than the regular EBs I fought to get to her.
Quote:
Yes. Because that's true.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I'm compelled to partially agree with J_B on this one, for this reason. The question that is *often* asked about *anything* is "why not." The presumption is that the burden of proof is not on the person asking, but on everyone else to justify why their request should not be satisfied.
|
If even one person wants something to happen, and there is absolutely no reason why it would be in any way costly for it to happen, then why shouldn't it happen?
The burden of proof is absolutely, 100%, on the people who say something shouldn't happen.
You say as much yourself:
Quote:
| If better large team and incarnate power scaling was possible with no cost and no problems then fine, I would be ok with adding it. |
If the people opposing the option can't even come up with one single mechanical reason against the idea, and have to resort to saying things like "I'm against it on principle", they have no case at all.
The burden of proof is absolutely on them.
Now if they do come up with potential problems then the burden of proof switches to the people in favour of adding the option and they then have to explain why those problems aren't really problems, come up with solutions to the problems, or explain why those problems are less significant than the advantages gained from the change (weighted appropriately).
But that's no different to any situation, once the burden of proof is satisfied by one side, it switches to the other. The original burden of proof, in this case, is most definitely with those against the option, and as long as they fail to satisfy it at all, as was the case for the first several pages of this thread, it remains with them.
Main Hero: Mazey - level 50 + 1 fire/fire/fire blaster.
Main Villain: Chained Bot - level 50 + 1 Robot/FF Mastermind.
BattleEngine - "And the prize for the most level headed response ever goes to Mazey"
[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.)