Do you Exercise Purposeful Gimping?
By
Agonus,
Posted on: 2012-03-24 22:32 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
You're really asking if people build for concept. Everyone does, to some degree. Anytime you pick an AT or power set combo that isn't the one consensus agrees is the absolute best, that's building for concept. Technically, any time you even take a travel power for it's own sake, it can be seen as a purely conceptual choice.
.
Quote:
I'll object to this being called "gimping," because you're now calling a chunk of the playerbase gimped for not using, or not being *able* to use, IOs. You can do *quite* a bit with SOs - and as you should well know, for quite some time you had no choice. |
Originally Posted by Winterminal
|
Heck, I've been running an Emp/Psi - not a high damage character by any means - on SOs through (a) the Mender Ramiel arc and (b) Dark Astoria. Only place I've had trouble, really? If you've gotten far enough into it, one mission that seems to be based in assuming you *are* on a team or have Judgement, etc. already. Does it take a little while to solo some of the stuff? Sure. But up to that one mission (with suicidal NPCs again) I think I'd faceplanted once, and that would have been avoidable.
Now, if you said "only TOs/DOs/no enhancements at all at 50," that I'd call intentionally limiting the character, and some people *do* do that just for the challenge. Same with "Only pool/temp powers."
It's the difference between having a car and having a car that's been tuned and modded to within an inch of its life - yes, the tuned car (should) perform better, have a higher top speed, better handling, etc. but that doesn't mean the *base* car it started as and that most people drive quite happily is "gimped."
well, I take jump kick a lot, hows that?
seriously, I dont min max, and I often let concept decide, when its possible. the game has never required optimal loadouts to do most of the stuff and it wont, so there is room for concept if that is what gives you fun. admittedly, my concepts demand more from the tailor and the bio section than the powers, so that conflict doesnt happen much, but if one arose, I'd have no problem going concept over play capacity.
I have a Scrapper who's powers are chiefly toggles. I wasn't intending to "gimp" the character, per se, but that's certainly a side effect.
And I don't much bother with IOs these days.
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:
You're completely right. I didn't mean to make it come off that way and I will edit my post. Sorry about that.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
[/LIST] I'll object to this being called "gimping," because you're now calling a chunk of the playerbase gimped for not using, or not being *able* to use, IOs. You can do *quite* a bit with SOs - and as you should well know, for quite some time you had no choice.
Heck, I've been running an Emp/Psi - not a high damage character by any means - on SOs through (a) the Mender Ramiel arc and (b) Dark Astoria. Only place I've had trouble, really? If you've gotten far enough into it, one mission that seems to be based in assuming you *are* on a team or have Judgement, etc. already. Does it take a little while to solo some of the stuff? Sure. But up to that one mission (with suicidal NPCs again) I think I'd faceplanted once, and that would have been avoidable. Now, if you said "only TOs/DOs/no enhancements at all at 50," that I'd call intentionally limiting the character, and some people *do* do that just for the challenge. Same with "Only pool/temp powers." It's the difference between having a car and having a car that's been tuned and modded to within an inch of its life - yes, the tuned car (should) perform better, have a higher top speed, better handling, etc. but that doesn't mean the *base* car it started as and that most people drive quite happily is "gimped." |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rian_frostdrake
well, I take jump kick a lot, hows that?
seriously, I dont min max, and I often let concept decide, when its possible. the game has never required optimal loadouts to do most of the stuff and it wont, so there is room for concept if that is what gives you fun. admittedly, my concepts demand more from the tailor and the bio section than the powers, so that conflict doesnt happen much, but if one arose, I'd have no problem going concept over play capacity. |
I suppose another way to ask this is: Are you someone who commonly will stop their character's power level at a certain point (for whatever reason), even if it means you may miss out on a certain chunk of content, or be less powerful than your peers?
@Winter. Because I'm Winter. Period.
I am a blaster first, and an alt-oholic second.
I do it on characters when I get tired of slotting for defense or recharge.
it saddens me that those are the only really worthwhile things to slot for, oh well I plan on making my MA/Fire armor scrapper try to squeeze alot of +damage sets if she can for the lulz.
no, but a freind of mine does, and I suspect he will probably post here soon. I'd say that my characters concepts are level independent, if i dislike a certain chunk of content, or a group that doesnt fight my character, there is usually another way to go around to not see it, and if its a power, i can just pick it and throw it in the closet. but that is my take, as i said, i know a guy who fits your thing exactly.
Quote:
Ah, asked this way, yes I do. I have a handful of characters whose concept was based on them performing in a specific zone. In those cases I turn off XP at a certain point so they never outlevel that particular zone.|
Originally Posted by Winterminal
I suppose another way to ask this is: Are you someone who commonly will stop their character's power level at a certain point (for whatever reason), even if it means you may miss out on a certain chunk of content, or be less powerful than your peers?
|
For example Daredevil protects Hell's Kitchen
Now I have a few other characters that will skip powers because they don't fit the concept I have in mind. For example I have a Rad/Rad that doesn't use the heals/buffs because he only emits harmful radiation.
I definitely don't min/max- I don't take the Fighting Pool on melee ATs (seems redundant) and before the Fitness Pool became inherent I didn't always take it (boring power picks).
Quote:
Well, like others have mentioned i sometimes skip useful powers because they don't fit the character concept, but i've only made one character that would be focused around a particular zone or level range. Although i am now considering a remake using newer powersets that would better with the theme.
|
Originally Posted by Winterminal
I get that.
I suppose another way to ask this is: Are you someone who commonly will stop their character's power level at a certain point (for whatever reason), even if it means you may miss out on a certain chunk of content, or be less powerful than your peers? |
Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Winterminal
You're completely right. I didn't mean to make it come off that way and I will edit my post. Sorry about that.
I get that. I suppose another way to ask this is: Are you someone who commonly will stop their character's power level at a certain point (for whatever reason), even if it means you may miss out on a certain chunk of content, or be less powerful than your peers? |
Just for the record, I hope I didn't come off as hostile with that objection. It wasn't meant to be, I just felt the point really needed making.
As far as the question itself...
I don't tend to care, in most situations, if I'm "less powerful than my peers," unless I'm running the same powerset/AT at the same level with what should be the same slotting and I'm falling behind somewhere. That usually tells me I should pay attention to what's going on because I'm missing something somewhere. It's a learning process.
Other than that... heck, like I said. I ran an Emp/Psy. I played Earth/FF to 50. Certainly not fast/powerful characters (in terms of damage and the like - my pylon soloing time is "hahaha, really, no, go on" and having it fall over short of breath from laughing at the attempt. Then having it one or two shot me.
I'm not honestly sure how to answer. Because I can say "Yes" and "No" with the same character at the same time in some instances. For instance, I have corruptors (Dark/Therm is a great example of this) with dual builds that you could say are "powerful enough" yet "not" - in both builds. The team build is very strong in support, yet weaker in offense than it could be. Another build on the same character has offense just pouring off of it, but team utility... er... yeah, not there, so it's less "powerful" than it could be. But that's why it has two builds - so I can vary the strength for the situation.
I've never gone to the extremes you can go to - petless masterminds, nothing but pool powers, nothing but TOs, etc. - because I know I don't have the patience for that. I also don't min/max.
I've had concepts I *thought* would be potential underperformers (grav/kin with powers chosen or skipped for a concept of a "fake Nictus") that weren't anywhere near as bad as I thought they would be. So I've *planned* to have to deal with that at times.
And I think I have one character I've level locked for RP reasons (not supposed to be "strong enough" to progress past 10 yet.)
So, TLDR version... I guess "Commonly, no, but on occasion or depending on definition, perhaps" would be my answer.
Why am I up this late? Being sick sucks >_>
Anyways, I think I know what you mean and I believe I do do that to a point. I have several examples:
-Some characters will only achieve a certain height in level for whatever reason. Like, my magitech maiden character only goes up to lvl 32 and her lvl is locked. I have alternate versions of characters to imply their varied skills; my main is a master of swords and a decent martial artist so I have versions of him with Katana, Dual Blades and Titan Weapons but since he's not as good a Hand-to-hand fighter, the Martial Arts version is locked at lvl 25.
-Some characters do not use all their powers. A lot of my characters do this. Such as my FM/SD/Mako Brute, he can only hover when he's wearing his robes because he's too heavy when wearing his armor and he only uses Tough when he's wearing his armor. I tend to heavily use his breath attacks when he's in hover mode. My DP/FM/Cold Blaster is 2 demons, the Ice demon only uses /Cold powers + Incendiary ammo when he's in control and the Fire demon only uses /Fire Manipulation + cryo rounds when she's in control...but I do let both use Build up and Hoar Frost...
-Some characters are stronger than others. To better emulate this, I have to make those strong characters strong first, leaving the others aside until I've widened the gap. My Fire/Storm/Dark corruptor is suppose to be my most powerful character and she's the only one with all Incarnate powers and uses them. I had to stop lvling my main and his alternate versions to accomplish this.
I don't bother using enhancements to differentiate power levels. Any of my characters can use IOs, but I tend to keep focused builds for characters who are suppose to be strong and frankenslot/basic IO everyone else...but even then, it's more for concept. If one of my characters is suppose to be resilient, I'll build them to be and if not I won't.
Generally I don't skip or not use powers/systems that increase my character's game performance. I feel like if my character is to have some sort of limitation or weakness, that can be portrayed in other ways (such as RP) without making choices that negatively impact their actual gameplay.
Comics are rife with instances of lesser characters rising to the occasion in fights they have no business winning, why wouldn't I want my character to be capable of the same thing?
@Oathbound & @Oathbound Too
Totally.
I always build to concept and if that means skipping certain 'must have' powers, I will. The most recent example that springs to mind is that my Dark/Dark Dominator will not be taking the pet because it doesn't fit his theme even though it will lower his DPS.
I also dislike using Incarnate powers on non-Incarnate content and wish it had never been allowed. I like the challenge of some old level 50 content.
On the other hand, when concept and build strength come together, it's joyous. My Plant/Storm/Stone Controller is built purely for concept but he capped S/L mostly by accident.
@Dante EU - Union Roleplayer and Altisis Victim
The Militia: Union RP Supergroup - www.themilitia.org.uk
I've been thinking about this a lot lately. It seems so many people on these boards do everything possible to soft cap defense. But, I think that makes it too easy. Also, it makes all of your characters the same. Conceptually, I like having weaknesses on some of my characters. I don't gimp them, but some are known to have glass jaws. I think of their willingness to get up again and again, as a heroic quality.
To an extent. I always build for theme, and even though I pretty much never write out backstories and bios I always like to have an idea of a character's history and personality. But at the same time, I would never go to the same extent you've listed:
Quote:
I guess my main beef with this is that you are limiting yourself in group content. There's a certain...performance threshhold that needs to be achieved in order to succeed, and stopping yourself short just because you feel like it means that everyone else has to pick up the slack, there's no upside beyond satisfying your private RPing impulses.|
Originally Posted by Winterminal
|
My general rule is that solo or in a preformed group of like-minded friends, you're free to do whatever you want, but in endgame team content, especially PUGs, you should always be bringing your A game (at least, relative to the capabilities of the character you are wanting to work on at the time). I admit that this idea is actually a carryover from older (and much harder) MMOs that I used to play, but I think the spirit of the rule still stands.
A circle forms, everybody comes round
Just to hear the incredible sound
Of a genius smashing expectations
- Jonathan Coulton
Quote:
I'd have to disagree. Most teams really don't care - as long as you're not sitting back at the door /em dance-ing or otherwise working against the team, as long as you're participating and everyone's having fun, it's good. |
Originally Posted by Mokalus
To an extent. I always build for theme, and even though I pretty much never write out backstories and bios I always like to have an idea of a character's history and personality. But at the same time, I would never go to the same extent you've listed:
I guess my main beef with this is that you are limiting yourself in group content. There's a certain...performance threshhold that needs to be achieved in order to succeed, and stopping yourself short just because you feel like it means that everyone else has to pick up the slack, there's no upside beyond satisfying your private RPing impulses. My general rule is that solo or in a preformed group of like-minded friends, you're free to do whatever you want, but in endgame team content, especially PUGs, you should always be bringing your A game (at least, relative to the capabilities of the character you are wanting to work on at the time). I admit that this idea is actually a carryover from older (and much harder) MMOs that I used to play, but I think the spirit of the rule still stands. |
There's just not that much "slack" to be had or to pick up, quite honestly. And I have yet to have someone say I don't have (for instance) enough defense or whatnot. Years ago (literally) I had a person or two complain that my Defender wasn't a "healer," but... really, they pretty much refused to learn, and it got to where "we need a healer" (outside of fairly specialized areas) was a red flag that it was going to be a bad team.
Specialized instances? Sure, someone may want to make sure everyone's +2 at least, etc, etc. But for the other 99.7% of the game, it just doesn't matter.
Quote:
Many people *love* to pick up that slack with their super mega-billion-IO-bees-knees-caps builds. If not, why would people bother to run off in random directions to solo crap while teamed?|
Originally Posted by Mokalus
I guess my main beef with this is that you are limiting yourself in group content. There's a certain...performance threshhold that needs to be achieved in order to succeed, and stopping yourself short just because you feel like it means that everyone else has to pick up the slack, there's no upside beyond satisfying your private RPing impulses.
|
And if anything, I tend to have to hold myself back anyway because when I'm on a team, I don't want to seem like I kill everything or that I tank the entire map or that everything is under a strangle-hold when you've got viable tanks to soak up aggro, melees who want to hit stuff and support who want their powers to contribute.
Conversely, when everyone works *better* than me, what does it matter if I hold off some powers? The team is steamrolling anyway. Even if I cared it'd steamroll faster, something could be done to get some enjoyment out of the experience since this is a game. And if that means holding off on powers for certain reasons, so be it.
I've never seen the point.
The character building angle doesn't appeal to me. Heroes don't get interesting because they can or can't punch a building, it's how they feel about punching that poor building that is cool to explore. Besides, if we're talking, for example, about using IOs instead of SOs, then the only difference is in technicalities. I can't really see any roleplaying bonus in doing 130 damage instead of 150. If anything, it means this particular character would take longer to get through the non-RP, purely mechanic parts of the game, as they'd earn experience at a slower rate.
Even the most minmaxed character isn't going to have enough power to tackle on absolutely every threat by himself, anyway.
Quote:
The thing is though, the performance threshold you're talking about is actually pretty low in this game. I can't speak to iTrials as I don't run them, but for the vast majority of encounters in this game being min-maxed with all the "right" power choices isn't really necessary. As long as someone's build isn't truly gimped (using only TO's at 50 for example) it really won't make much difference.
|
Originally Posted by Mokalus
To an extent. I always build for theme, and even though I pretty much never write out backstories and bios I always like to have an idea of a character's history and personality. But at the same time, I would never go to the same extent you've listed:
I guess my main beef with this is that you are limiting yourself in group content. There's a certain...performance threshhold that needs to be achieved in order to succeed, and stopping yourself short just because you feel like it means that everyone else has to pick up the slack, there's no upside beyond satisfying your private RPing impulses. My general rule is that solo or in a preformed group of like-minded friends, you're free to do whatever you want, but in endgame team content, especially PUGs, you should always be bringing your A game (at least, relative to the capabilities of the character you are wanting to work on at the time). I admit that this idea is actually a carryover from older (and much harder) MMOs that I used to play, but I think the spirit of the rule still stands. |
Quote:
I suppose I should make it clear, when I was writing that, I was mostly thinking about incarnate trials, since we just came out of a 2XP weekend with a lot of fresh 50s. On my server at least, the results were somewhat less than impressive even on the easier trials. I'm not complaining about people wanting to get incarnate powers for their new 50s or whatever, I'm just saying that a lot of people underestimated just how much was needed to contribute.|
Originally Posted by Steel_Shaman
The thing is though, the performance threshold you're talking about is actually pretty low in this game. I can't speak to iTrials as I don't run them, but for the vast majority of encounters in this game being min-maxed with all the "right" power choices isn't really necessary. As long as someone's build isn't truly gimped (using only TO's at 50 for example) it really won't make much difference.
|
One person bringing an under-performing character to a team of +3s is probably not going to make a noticable drop in overall performance, but the more of them you get, the more obvious things become. My point with regards to the original topic is that having tier 3 Destiny/Lore and not using them certainly isn't helping these situations.
A circle forms, everybody comes round
Just to hear the incredible sound
Of a genius smashing expectations
- Jonathan Coulton
I think the thread shows this isn't a black-and-white thing, really. There are degrees, and all but the most hard-core performance junkies probably do this to some degree, but I would have to say "no", I don't do this to what I think of as a meaningful degree.
Concept always comes after powerset choice for me. I ask "why is this person a Primary/Secondary Archetype?", rather than start with a concept and picking powers that fit it. Once chosen, I decide what direction I want to take that character and strive to make it as effective as possible. I don't readily sacrifice my chosen concept to that, but I will adapt, and try to find ways to explain why I might have a certain power that fit within the concept. Sometimes, if I can't explain it at all, I won't do something that seems to violate the concept, and that's about as close as I get.
But to the specific question asked, no I never intentially bound the power of my characters, or limit what they face. That's not enjoyable to me.
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
I've ran into a few concept Tankers without Taunt in itrials. It's kinda funny seeing the leader tell them to pull Siege/Nightstar/Penny/GM bosses to specific areas only for them being unable to do it and when the leader's about to get frustrated thinking they're deliberately refusing to pay attention/follow requests, a Brute or Scrapper or second Tanker who wasn't the 'main' realizes the main Tanker is unable to pull them since they don't have Taunt and has to take over, haha.
All of my 'Paragon Protector' Brutes and Scrappers took Fly for concept reasons, but it's almost a moot point since I don't mind Fly's slow speed in comparison to other faster travel powers.
Regarding not using incarnate powers in itrials, almost nobody will care, as long as you still have your level shifts, which is the main thing allowing you to fight more efficiently. If you choose to deliberately never build up your shifts or unslot them so you'll always be a straight 50, please don't join a team for Dilemma Diabolique Trial. :3 The same goes for Apex or Tin Mage and unslotting/not having any Alpha because it doesn't fit your concept. XD
Ideon's Paragonwiki page
Member of Paragon/Rogue Knights
Arc: 60092 - Supa Rumble in the Park
"Keep living the dream, and never let any jerk tell you what to do."
-- High-Roller
Quote:
I can understand that. The Devs have made it clear from the get-go they were approaching iTrial design a little differently than the rest of the game.
|
Originally Posted by Mokalus
I suppose I should make it clear, when I was writing that, I was mostly thinking about incarnate trials, since we just came out of a 2XP weekend with a lot of fresh 50s. On my server at least, the results were somewhat less than impressive even on the easier trials. I'm not complaining about people wanting to get incarnate powers for their new 50s or whatever, I'm just saying that a lot of people underestimated just how much was needed to contribute.
One person bringing an under-performing character to a team of +3s is probably not going to make a noticable drop in overall performance, but the more of them you get, the more obvious things become. My point with regards to the original topic is that having tier 3 Destiny/Lore and not using them certainly isn't helping these situations. |
I do.
[EDIT](Copied from my later post) I suppose another way to ask this is: Are you someone who commonly will stop their character's power level at a certain point (for whatever reason), even if it means you may miss out on a certain chunk of content, or be less powerful than your peers?[/EDIT]
In my opinion, the characters of comic book lore are most interesting because of what they cannot do. Not only do their short-comings make them unique, but the flaws in their abilities allow for dramatic tension, and dramatic tension is what keeps us, the audience, enthralled.
Most of my characters have flaws, or a limit to their power, because that is how I stay interested in them.
- If I feel a character's concept calls for a power level equal to that achieved only with SOs, I'll only use SOs. Not that this is "gimping" but more ceasing an increase in power because that character's power level only calls for SOs.
- None of my level 50 characters (thus far) have taken and use every Incarnate Ability.
- None of my characters use Incarnate abilities during non-Incarnate combat.
- While all of my Incarnates get to +3, only one so far actually has any use for Destiny or Lore. The rest take Destiny and Lore simply to even the playing field of levels during Incarnate content. The powers themselves may as well not even exist.
These are just some examples of what I am talking about. However, I know to some I sound crazy, not using every tool I have available. I respect that, everyone has their own playing style.I am curious: Do any of you do this as well? If you do, how do you create the flaws? If you do not, how come? I am interested in both sides, and if anything, the opposite viewpoint is always the most interesting since it is clearly not what I see already.
@Winter. Because I'm Winter. Period.
I am a blaster first, and an alt-oholic second.