Announcements

Join the ongoing conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/w6Tpkp2

Please read the current update for instructions on downloading the latest update. Players with Mac versions of the game will not be affected, but you will have a slightly longer wait for your version of the new maps. Please make a copy of your character folder before running the new update, just to make sure you don't lose any of your custom work.

It looks like we can give everyone a list of minimum specs for running City of Titans. Please keep in mind that this is 'for now' until we are able to add more graphics and other system refinements. Currently you will need :
Windows 10 or later required; no Intel integrated graphics like UHD, must have AMD or NVIDIA card or discrete chipset with 4Gb or more of VRAM
At least 16GB of main DRAM.
These stats may change as we continue to test.

To purchase your copy of the City of Titans Launcher, visit our store at https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/ A purchase of $50 or more will give you a link to download the Launcher for Windows or Mac based machines.

The Good Guys Always Win

62 posts / 0 new
Last post
TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
The Good Guys Always Win

Before I get started I just want to say, I know that there will be player villains in this game and I'm not trying to argue against that. I'm just venting and you don't like it don't worry because it doesn't matter.

I am interested in finding out if anyone else feels like I do, and I'm wondering if anyone has any ideas for how to get the kind of experience I'm looking for.

The thing that attracts me to superheroes (and fantasies in general) is that it's an emotional escape from a morally ambiguous world where it often seems that evil wins more often than not. I want to see the good guys win. I want to feel like the struggle is worth it.

That's why pvp and having player villains really bother me. If players are bad guys, they want the game to be fair to them, they want a fair chance to win. That ruins the feel of the game for me. Bad guys are NOT supposed to win. That's just how it's supposed to be. The best a villain should be able to hope for is to get away, after his plans are ruined, so he can be a menace, again, another day.

Seriously what's the point of even playing if I can't get what I'm looking for from the game? I really want to play a good superhero game that gives me the thrill of watching my character in action and seeing him overcome evil and save the day.

Hey GLUKE, I hope this explains what I meant on the terrorism thread, so you can understand that I don't have anything personally against you, it's just that we want different kinds of games and what you want seriously hinders my ability to get what I want, in the same game.

Lin Chiao Feng
Lin Chiao Feng's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 15 hours ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/02/2013 - 09:27
Would you have a problem

Would you have a problem playing against player villains that didn't expect to win? Some of us are in it for the wardrobe, laugh track, and snarky lines.

Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...

Lin Chiao Feng
Lin Chiao Feng's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 15 hours ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/02/2013 - 09:27
There's also games like the

There's also games like the coming Star Wars Battlefront, which has an assault on Hoth scenario where, like in the movie, the rebels are pretty much guaranteed to lose, and the goal is to not lose badly. How about that kind of scenario?

Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
I won't say I'm like Paladin,

I won't say I'm like Paladin, exactly, but I AM a 'Paladin' at heart, so I like my good guys to be All Good and defeat evilstupidgreedyselfishbastard Villains every time. My instinct is that Light is Right, Love is a Duty (and a pleasure), and everything should be better in the end. I mean, my main hero is a spaklyglowing dressed in white punch-evil-in-the-face-with-fists-of-Light! Tanker with a smile on his face. What more positive message do you need?

I tried Red-side and found it oppressive. All of the mission-givers treated me like trash and sent me out to do rotten things. Definitely not how I want to spend my time.

I want to play in an environment where the policeman says 'Good job!' and the civilians say 'Thank you very much, I baked you a pie!'

I get that other crap in my daily life.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Empyrean
Empyrean's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/16/2014 - 07:51
It takes all kinds, and there

It takes all kinds, and there should be gameplay for all kinds. Redside, Vigi, Rogue, and plain ole stupid vanilla Hero. So everyone can have fun!

For me personally, cheesy as it is, I believe in doing the right thing in the moment, even if it means you lose--badly. broken, tasting your own blood--in the long run.

"Good guys" don't always win. That's not why they're good.

The ends doesn't justify the means. The means is all there is.

The ends is abstract, possible, in the future. But the means?

Well, the means is who you are right now and what you do every moment.

The ends is why people do bad things.

The means is Life.

FIGHT EVIL! (or go cause trouble so the Heroes have something to do.)

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Most so-called "villains" don

Most so-called "villains" don't actually think of themselves as being "evil".

Sure you have the low-level street punk/anarchists who just like to mindlessly smash things just for the sake of smashing things. They don't really have much of a well thought out "moral mindset" either way.

But many of the upper level boss-type villains actually think they are trying to do something "worthwhile" for everyone, or at least for themselves, and they tend to see "heroes" from their point of view as people who at the very least don't understand the "good" and relevant things they are trying to accomplish. Even Darth Vader and his Emperor didn't want to technically "destroy" the galaxy because naturally that would be a "bad" thing - they just wanted everyone to "conform" to the way they wanted them to be which for some reason the rebels didn't like. Clearly the rebels were the real anti-establishment "troublemakers" in that scenario. *shrugs*

Unless you're talking about children's fairytale books nobody in the real world (or even the superhero world) ever actually wears 100% "white hats" and "black hats" in a strictly binary sense. Moral relativism for the win!

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
Lothic

Lothic
What you've said is both true and irrelevant. We're talking about a game where an alignment system makes good and evil into measurable realities, even without that the designation villain still has meaning. And these labels are not arbitrary either.
Villains always have some explanation or excuse for what they do, and sometimes it even turns out (when the whole story is revealed) that the person we thought was a villain really isn't (though not in the game, because the red box is an infallible sign). But no matter what they say they do things that can't be excused, even by their, possibly lofty, goals. It takes a very urgent need to justify most crimes, and there are some crimes like genocide that just can't be justified.

But all of that has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.
I want to see good triumph over evil, every time because for me that's what superhero fantasies are all about.
No matter how complex the story may be, good triumphing in the end is what I want to see.

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Lothic
What you've said is both true and irrelevant. We're talking about a game where an alignment system makes good and evil into measurable realities, even without that the designation villain still has meaning. And these labels are not arbitrary either.
Villains always have some explanation or excuse for what they do, and sometimes it even turns out (when the whole story is revealed) that the person we thought was a villain really isn't (though not in the game, because the red box is an infallible sign). But no matter what they say they do things that can't be excused, even by their, possibly lofty, goals. It takes a very urgent need to justify most crimes, and there are some crimes like genocide that just can't be justified.
But all of that has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.
I want to see good triumph over evil, every time because for me that's what superhero fantasies are all about.
No matter how complex the story may be, good triumphing in the end is what I want to see.

OK if you don't want to talk about the "realities" of good and evil in the real world and just want to focus on the game mechanics of a superhero MMO then your idea that players who play villains should always ultimately lose and players who play heroes should always ultimately win is laughably naive at the very least. It's akin to saying "I have this cool game called chess and it has white pieces and black pieces but if you ever play with the black pieces you have to accept that you will always have to lose because that's the way I want the rules of that game to work".

Again if we take the whole "good and evil" debate out of it games simply don't work on the concept of "permanent winners" and "permanent losers". No one would ever play a game where one side was essentially guaranteed to always win and the other side was guaranteed to always lose by default - unless you're the King of course...

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
Lothic

Lothic
Please reread the opening post. This time pay attention.
As often happens you seem to have missed the point completely.

I personally suspect that the only way to get what I want is to continue doing what I always have. Stay away from PVP and play solo most of the time.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
Ah, but Chess pits two

Ah, but Chess pits two 'heroes' against each other. Also, chess is 'mere strategy' and has no underlying story, in which to embed ethical choices.

Lothic, your argument is valid, but your example doesn't follow. This is an MMO and it is ultimately all about the stories, and the ethical choices made by the players.

In real life there is (supposed to be) a clear, positive reward for proper (positive) choices. The fact that this often isn't so, is a tragedy. I don't entertain myself with tragedies, I prefer positive endings. So I'd like for any game I play to support that supposition.

My experience with every 'villain-path' game I've played has been the 'ironical reward' for causing tragedies. Most of the time, the villain simply isn't offered a 'positive' choice, but rather a series of 'negative' ones. As a 'positive' player I always try to make the most constructive choice possible, so I often 'fail' as a villain.

I don't require that I 'win' everything, but I do prefer positive, constructive results.

Be Well!
Fireheart

TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
Thank you Fireheart. That was

Thank you Fireheart. That was very helpful.

TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
Lin Chiao Feng wrote:
Lin Chiao Feng wrote:

Would you have a problem playing against player villains that didn't expect to win? Some of us are in it for the wardrobe, laugh track, and snarky lines.

I wasn't ignoring you, just wasn't sure how to reply at first.
Are there really players like that out there?
I mean, I know there players who don't care which side they're on and just want to look cool, but are there really players who would be content to lose over and over?
I mean, I know we all played that way in the early days of video games. Defeat was inevitable in every in game. It was just a matter of how much you could get done before you died,
but does anyone still play that way?
Would they be content knowing that the reason they couldn't win was because they chose the bad side?

As for your second post: suggesting that I try a different game is always going to feel like you're saying "go away" as politely as possible.

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

That's why pvp and having player villains really bother me. If players are bad guys, they want the game to be fair to them, they want a fair chance to win. That ruins the feel of the game for me. Bad guys are NOT supposed to win. That's just how it's supposed to be. The best a villain should be able to hope for is to get away, after his plans are ruined, so he can be a menace, again, another day..

You should be able to control you own personal game experience to a large degree. The fact that other players will choose the villain path is unlikely to affect you unless you let it.

You can choose to only do those missions that allow you to be the hero you want to be. Never team with the morally ambiguous players. Join or build a guild of like minded players to further that goal. Always take the heroic option when they are presented and so forth.

It makes no sense to worry about what other players are doing when you are perfectly capable of avoiding them and the things they do.

Quote:

Seriously what's the point of even playing if I can't get what I'm looking for from the game? I really want to play a good superhero game that gives me the thrill of watching my character in action and seeing him overcome evil and save the day..

There is no point playing a game you do not enjoy. And if the deal breaker for you is just 'seeing' that others have taken a different path then there is no point in playing any MMO.

I do sympathize with the idea that things are not how you want them to be... but sometimes you have to accept a bit of sand in your shorts if you want a day at the beach.

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 weeks ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Lothic
Please reread the opening post. This time pay attention.
As often happens you seem to have missed the point completely.
I personally suspect that the only way to get what I want is to continue doing what I always have. Stay away from PVP and play solo most of the time.

Well it's either what Lothic said or the complete removal of the villain side, those are the only two options I can see in your OP. Personally I can't agree with either of them since I think the first one would effectively force everyone into a certain mindset and the second one would remove too much from the game.

If it's something else than those two then perhaps you didn't explain it good enough.

TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Before I get started I just want to say, I know that there will be player villains in this game and I'm not trying to argue against that. I'm just venting and you don't like it don't worry because it doesn't matter.

I am interested in finding out if anyone else feels like I do, and I'm wondering if anyone has any ideas for how to get the kind of experience I'm looking for.

Islandtrevor's idea was more like what I was hoping for but I suspect it will be much easier to do as I said before:

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

I personally suspect that the only way to get what I want is to continue doing what I always have. Stay away from PVP and play solo most of the time.

Once again my reasons for prefering to solo seem very sound and no one is giving any motivation to be "part of community" even though many people still insist that I'm somehow missing the whole point of an MMO.
Of course that doesn't bother me. As far as I'm concerned, an MMO is just a big video game. I just hope there won't be too much game content that requires a team at every difficulty setting.

Little Red Ragnarok
Little Red Ragnarok's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
kickstarter
Joined: 08/11/2015 - 14:56
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Once again my reasons for prefering to solo seem very sound and no one is giving any motivation to be "part of community" even though many people still insist that I'm somehow missing the whole point of an MMO.

What do you mean by "no one is giving any motivation to be "part of the community""?

TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
I mean, it doesn't sound like

I mean, it doesn't sound like I could have fun teaming with other players.
I know islandtrevor talked about only teaming with certain people and building a Super Group of like minded people.
but looking for those people sounds like too much work. Soloing is a lot easier.
Remember one of the reasons I gave for posting this in the first place, was to find out if anyone else felt like I do.
Maybe I could team with Fireheart.

I know I'm rambling
Didn't get enough sleep last night.
Running on energy drinks

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Nothing wrong with soloing. I

Nothing wrong with soloing. I tend to prefer to play either with a close group of real life friends who share my desires in gameplay or soloing myself.

Kiyori Anoyui
Kiyori Anoyui's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/10/2013 - 11:03
If you wanna find people who

If you wanna find people who are okay with losing/dying, go to the dark souls community xD The problem with this whole thing is that this game is going for a shades of grey tactic. And to contradict Fireheart, whether you are a good or bad guy, and you see a police officer beating someone to death, you go to interrupt it, then you immediately are in the wrong, even though you might have just saved someones life. Either way you'll most likely end up in jail. So doing something right doesn't always equal positive rewards. And say if you just let it happen and the person died. You know in your heart it was wrong to not act, but you didn't end up in jail.

So my question to that example is: Does not acting make you a good person because you ended up with a positive reward(not going to jail). And does acting make you a bad person because you ended up with a negative reward(going to jail)?

I'm sure on the heroes side it will be more of the good guy always winning. But none the less, I don't think the good guy always wins works in a MMO Heroes & Villains game, as long as they are interacting with each other that is. It could be like a minigame or something, where you can choose to be part of the bad guys, knowing that you will lose, but it is a game where you get points based off how much havoc you wreak. So in a way you can win as a bad guy, but the heroes are still saving the day.

The Carnival of Light in the Phoenix Rising
"We never lose our demons, we only learn to live above them." - The Ancient One

Avatar by lilshironeko

Lin Chiao Feng
Lin Chiao Feng's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 15 hours ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/02/2013 - 09:27
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Lin Chiao Feng wrote:
Would you have a problem playing against player villains that didn't expect to win? Some of us are in it for the wardrobe, laugh track, and snarky lines.

I wasn't ignoring you, just wasn't sure how to reply at first.

Oh, no problem. I don't mind when people take their time answering.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Are there really players like that out there?

Seriously? Yes. Not everyone gets to be Kirk and cheat their way out of a no-win scenario in games.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

I mean, I know there players who don't care which side they're on and just want to look cool, but are there really players who would be content to lose over and over?

It depends on the game, really. Have you looked into professional wrestling? Not necessarily the big, flashy WWE stuff, but the smaller-scale stuff.

Also look into gambling. The odds are always in favor of the house. But there are no end of players who hope to beat the house.

And sure, those aren't cases where they're guaranteed to win all games. Except the wrestling case, where the audience, much like you, really wants the good guys to win and the bad guys to lose, so they script it. Sometimes the script will give the bad guys a "win", but you know the good guys will come back and get revenge. (See also "The Empire Strikes Back", wherein the Rebels largely get their asses handed to them.)

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

I mean, I know we all played that way in the early days of video games. Defeat was inevitable in every in game. It was just a matter of how much you could get done before you died,
but does anyone still play that way?

One could argue that "how much you could get done before you died" is more a model of real life, though. So if you found yourself in a game like that, wouldn't it be like living another life?

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Would they be content knowing that the reason they couldn't win was because they chose the bad side?

What, someone told them? Funny thing is... that usually motivates them even more!

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

As for your second post: suggesting that I try a different game is always going to feel like you're saying "go away" as politely as possible.

I didn't mean that! I was providing an example of a game where one side is pretty much guaranteed to lose. A game people are actually buying, too. To lose.

Listen, there's a whole genre of literature that's all about the good guys winning and the bad guys losing. It's called "American fairy tales." (The Brothers Grimm ones, by comparison, are far more often about evil winning.) Disney has created a giant media empire selling stories like that. But, yes, they are a subset of all media.

Likewise, if you choose to limit yourself to just the good-guys-win-and-bad-guys-lose games, you're obviously only going to be playing a subset of the games out there, and only part of the games like CoT that have a wider variety of content. Just accept it, have fun with the parts you play, and don't worry about the parts you don't. IIRC you're not going to get forced into PvP (I did almost no PvP myself) and you don't have to change your alignment against your will. So if other players pressure you, you can always tell them to go mez themselves.

P.S. I totally understand the "I put up with this shit in RL, why do i want to deal with it in a game" feeling. I had a friend in the old Hero Dawn SG who refused to get involved in any SG leadership stuff because he was a divorce counselor in RL and didn't want to deal with even more drama. But he didn't demand the abolition of SGs, either.

Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...

Lin Chiao Feng
Lin Chiao Feng's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 15 hours ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/02/2013 - 09:27
P.S. Just because you don't

P.S. Just because you don't want to deal with the dark sides of the game, and want to stick to the blue-only side, doesn't mean there will be no-one else playing like that. You could always play with other players like that, and there will likely be supergroups that stick to good-guys-always-win content, too. So no, you're not being excluded from the community. You're only voluntarily staying out of part of it. Just like how lots of people like to stay out of "that part" of town where "those people" live, and can still live full lives.

Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...

TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
Kiyori Anoyui wrote:
Kiyori Anoyui wrote:

And to contradict Fireheart, whether you are a good or bad guy, and you see a police officer beating someone to death, you go to interrupt it, then you immediately are in the wrong, even though you might have just saved someones life. Either way you'll most likely end up in jail. So doing something right doesn't always equal positive rewards. And say if you just let it happen and the person died. You know in your heart it was wrong to not act, but you didn't end up in jail.
So my question to that example is: Does not acting make you a good person because you ended up with a positive reward(not going to jail). And does acting make you a bad person because you ended up with a negative reward(going to jail)?

Actually that doesn't contradict what Fireheart said it's just an example of what he called a tragedy.

Lin Chiao Feng wrote:

Just accept it, have fun with the parts you play, and don't worry about the parts you don't. IIRC you're not going to get forced into PvP (I did almost no PvP myself) and you don't have to change your alignment against your will. So if other players pressure you, you can always tell them to go mez themselves.

Looks like this is the best answer I'm getting.

Lin Chiao Feng wrote:

P.S. I totally understand the "I put up with this shit in RL, why do i want to deal with it in a game" feeling. I had a friend in the old Hero Dawn SG who refused to get involved in any SG leadership stuff because he was a divorce counselor in RL and didn't want to deal with even more drama. But he didn't demand the abolition of SGs, either.

Yeh I still want an SG for my own toons so I can decorate my base and transfer stuff from one toon to another easily. Too bad I won't be able to get group shots or team up with myself.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
I don't quite get the sense

I don't quite get the sense that Paladin is lobbying for a game with no 'Red-side' at all. I do feel that what _I_ want, and maybe Paladin too, is a game with a very strong Heroic story. I want an environment where my efforts lead to good things. Where my contribution to the story is positive, despite any set-backs I may face. If I fail, then I want a chance to pull myself together and win the next one.

If a mission boss is just too tough to beat (by myself), then I want to be able to call out to the community and find a partner, and go back and show that pixellated reprobate the Power of a good team. I made a lot of good friends in CoH just by partnering with someone random. (Seriously, my Friends buffer overloaded repeatedly.)

And I'd just as soon Not have some PC villain's 'stink' in my face, while I'm doing it. I played DCUO and there was nothing more frustrating than trying to accomplish a mission, while some PC villain was using the people I was Rescuing as targets for his villainous plan. And the Open-world PvP that was continually staged right in front of the Newbie Spawn Points was vastly annoying. I mean, if you're a new guy, just setting out to find some thugs to 'arrest' and the first thing you see is two 'heroes' screaming filth and trying to kill each other, while others stand around and Watch... This is not a positive, heroic experience.

Worse, if you're a new guy, just trying to understand the game, trying to reach the town services and sell off some loot and maybe buy a couple of useful items, and you cannot MOVE, because some high-level cyber-bully is Spamming duel 'requests' at you... Well, I decided not to play that game, and chose City of Heroes instead.

I would happily see Red-siders and PvPers banished to a different server, so I didn't have to deal with them.

Meanwhile, I'd like to enjoy a rich environment full of uplifting stories of challenge and success.

Be Well!
Fireheart

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

I don't quite get the sense that Paladin is lobbying for a game with no 'Red-side' at all..

I think that's exactly what he does want. He has actually said this very thing in other threads.

Quote:

I do feel that what _I_ want, and maybe Paladin too, is a game with a very strong Heroic story. I want an environment where my efforts lead to good things. Where my contribution to the story is positive, despite any set-backs I may face. If I fail, then I want a chance to pull myself together and win the next one..

These are all things I want as well.

But I also want the cathartic release of being the bad boy who takes what he wants when he wants and no one can tell him otherwise. Then again I would also like to be able to explore the moral ambiguity of being hated by those I protect or loved by those I oppress.

In short...I want options. The game should have room enough for everyone.

TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
islandtrevor72 wrote:
islandtrevor72 wrote:

I think that's exactly what he does want. He has actually said this very thing in other threads.

Yes, I do Want that but once again that's not what THIS thread is about. Fireheart is right about what I'm asking for, and he says it a lot better than I could.

Lin Chiao Feng
Lin Chiao Feng's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 15 hours ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/02/2013 - 09:27
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Yeh I still want an SG for my own toons so I can decorate my base and transfer stuff from one toon to another easily. Too bad I won't be able to get group shots or team up with myself.

IIRC you'll still get player housing, so you don't need a full SG for that. Why not look for an SG which plays like you do? Then you won't have to solo all the time. Seriously, you're not the only player who'll want to ignore PvP and Red side stuff.

Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

Yes, I do Want that but once again that's not what THIS thread is about. Fireheart is right about what I'm asking for, and he says it a lot better than I could..

I get what your thread is about. That's why I responded with a counterpoint to his (and your) desires to see heroic gameplay with the novel idea that you can have one as well as the other.

No game...heck no form of entertainment is going to perfectly cater to an individual and its up to us as consumers to decide just what we are willing to accept in this regard. For my money I would hope the game includes various playstyles and story elements instead of the static black and white of cartoon good and evil.

Again, if you are not satisfied or willing to accept some of the feature the game is going to include then you should keep fighting for what you want. But you can't blame others for not agreeing with you.

TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
OK, then here we go:

OK, then here we go:
Anyone want to join a Heroes only SG that will team up for street patrolling, missions and fighting giant monsters but not for PVP?

I'll call it THE KNIGHTS OF SAINT GEORGE. You can team up any time you feel like it, but if you want to solo a lot and just call the team when you really need help, that's totally cool. We'll have one night a week that we'll plan on getting together to do stuff that requires teams.

Foradain
Foradain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 21:06
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

OK, then here we go:
Anyone want to join a Heroes only SG that will team up for street patrolling, missions and fighting giant monsters but not for PVP?
I'll call it THE KNIGHTS OF SAINT GEORGE. You can team up any time you feel like it, but if you want to solo a lot and just call the team when you really need help, that's totally cool. We'll have one night a week that we'll plan on getting together to do stuff that requires teams.

Over in the Player Help and Information forum there's a subforum called Recruitment: Groups and Events. That's where most of the supergroup recruiting threads are going.

Now I have to make a character that in D&D would be a dragonborn paladin... ^_^

Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
Foradain's Character Conclave
.
Avatar courtesy of Satellite9 Irezoomie

WarBird
WarBird's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 9 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/17/2013 - 19:11
Hey, Paladin. My characters

Hey, Paladin. My characters ran a gamut of motivations, from a sickening goody-two-shoes to the extremely pragmatic anti-hero. I admit that I was never able to actually push the envelope to truly 'evil'. (I felt like my soul was getting all sticky)

I'm absolutely certain that I will have more than a few characters that I will play just the way you wish. In fact, whenever I played one in CoH and found myself teamed with a "morally ambiguous" individual I would 'harumph' a lot and shake my head in disgust via team chat. I looked at it as an opportunity for roleplay (without disrupting the mission, of course) Sometimes, it would lead to a (strictly for fun) 1on1 PvP challenge after a mission, which usually led to a lot of hilarious trash talk and a new friend once we were OOC.

If you look at all the By-the-Code heroes in JLA, Avengers and so on, you realize that even they occasionally make room for the "ethically challenged" when combining forces for the ultimate good. I'm not saying you should do anything other than what you absolutely feel comfortable with, or enjoy. But if you open your mind, while maintaining your reason, you might find a broader world to live your fantasy in. :D

Oh, and not to stick pins or anything, The Knights of the Order of St. George are an actual modern, living organization. They are the oldest order of Knighthood in England, but still exist. May I suggest, as a Paladin, you wouldn't want to step on toes. OTH, in our alternate Superworld, maybe the Order exists as an organization to battle evil in a real living sense. Who knows?!

Gorgon
Gorgon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 4 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 05/15/2014 - 11:46
Lin Chiao Feng wrote:
Lin Chiao Feng wrote:

There's also games like the coming Star Wars Battlefront, which has an assault on Hoth scenario where, like in the movie, the rebels are pretty much guaranteed to lose, and the goal is to not lose badly. How about that kind of scenario?

The last thing I found fun to play on Champions was the Zombie Apocalypse PvP challenge. Players were randomly assigned to start as defenders, or as a zombie (with the same powers). As players died, they rose up as zombies. The goal was to survive to the time limit. Almost never did this happen as full loss was the intent, aided by neverending streams of npc zombies.

That died several years back with the introduction of quick (5 minute) easy-click mini-mission "alerts" that gave xp.

ETA: That is exactly the kind of thing I want to see overwhelm actual zones, requiring reclamation by heroes, even if it takes weeks (or never) with temporary shop being set up elsewhere by various NPCs who have no safe zone anymore. Nowhere is safe!

__________________

The very existence of the taunting tank irritates, for it requires idiotic AI that obeys the taunt.

Comicsluvr
Comicsluvr's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/07/2013 - 03:39
Some of the best comics

Some of the best comics stories have arisen out of the hero losing. Rorshach got caught by the police. 30 million people died at the end of the movie. The villain lived...and got richer. How many times have Batman, Superman and the rest gotten captured? That can't happen unless they lose.

Winning all the time means boredom. Less risk = less emotional reward IMHO

I remember when Star Wars was cool...a long, long time ago...

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Comicsluvr wrote:
Comicsluvr wrote:

Winning all the time means boredom. Less risk = less emotional reward IMHO

Winning all the time means bare minimum baseline never to be challenged under any circumstances expectation in MMORPGs.

FTFY

NOT winning all the time means RAGEQUIT.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Greyhawk
Greyhawk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/03/2015 - 19:17
If I have been reading all

If I have been reading all the preview information correctly (no guarantee on that, of course) then yes, Mighty Paladin, you will be able to be the righteous hero who always fights for good and once the game gets rolling, as long as you chat with other players from time to time, I'm sure you will eventually build a cartel of like-minded players who are online the same times as you are. You might even be able find a few who willing and happy be PC punching bags for your PvP escapades. Probably not many, but masochism is a very real thing so if you are patient and open with your ideas I'm sure eventually you will find a few.

But don't be surprised if over time you also discover that the real people behind your hero friends are sometimes your villain rivals when they play different characters. Very few people in the modern world are capable of single-minded pursuit of "good".

Even so, I have some problems with how you are defining "good". As a writer and a gamer and a prolific reader, I have over the course of my life developed a powerful mistrust for "good". Far too often "good" simply means, "agrees with everything I say and do", which often results in "good" creating some of the most evil results imaginable. Even in comic books and fairytales, "good" is often more violent and destructive than the "evil" villains it seeks to destroy.

In comic books, games, fiction, and life, the only real difference I find between "good" and "evil" is I trust "evil" even less than I trust "good".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My author page at Amazon: https://amzn.to/2MPvkRX
My novelty shirts: https://amzn.to/31Sld32

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
Greyhawk wrote:
Greyhawk wrote:

In comic books, games, fiction, and life, the only real difference I find between "good" and "evil" is I trust "evil" even less than I trust "good".

I don't disagree with your basic sentiment, but Paladins are expected to hold a slightly rarer standard that includes gentleness. Personally, a lot of my Paladin-like attitudes grow out of empathy. I can often see the other guy's point of view, but sometimes that view is so twisted that the only solution is to cut it out and light it on fire, then exorcise the ashes.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Gorgon
Gorgon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 4 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 05/15/2014 - 11:46
Good guys always win...in the

Good guys always win...in the end. That doesn't mean they don't lose earlier on. Batman famously lost the first fight in the old TV shows so they could do a silly cliffhanger of getting dumped in acid or shot out of a cannon to lead to the next episode, same bat time, same bat channel!

It would be funny if the bad guys, in a balanced PvP, won a battle, then as a reward, lost as good npc reinforcements swarmed in.

__________________

The very existence of the taunting tank irritates, for it requires idiotic AI that obeys the taunt.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
I'm going to throw a monkey

I'm going to throw a monkey wrench here. Okay. Everybody ready?

{...}

What about scenarios that are written and designed in such a way that the first attempt (by the Heroes, duh) ALWAYS FAILS ...?

I'm not talking stuff like you wake up Reichsman and he SMITE!™s you with the Power Of Plot Armor. No, I'm talking about scenarios where the design intent is to Wipe The Team in straightforward combat the first time out ... EVERY TIME the scenario gets run.

Now I know that there are a lot of people immediately shaking their heads and muttering "well how is THAT fair?" already. Just hear me out, I'm not done yet.

So the first time your Team goes up against The Big Bad™ they mop the floor with your Team and it is a pure No Win Scenario. The Design Intent from the outset is that the first run against The Big Bad™ is the classic Impossible Mission ... because it is designed to be Impossible ... full stop.

Then you get a second crack against The Big Bad™ ... and this time The Big Bad™ is ever so slightly less impossible, but still really darn munchkin.

Then you get a third crack at The Big Bad™ ... and this time The Big Bad™ is, again, ever so slightly less impossible, but still pretty hardcore munchkin.

Wash, rinse, repeat ... making The Big Bad™ slightly less impossible to defeat each time the Team goes up against them ... until the Team finally succeeds in defeating The Big Bad™.

Essentially, design what BEGINS as a No Win Scenario ... that gradually shifts in each iteration until the Team successfully manages to Win.

The CHALLENGE then is ... how FEW iterations of facing off against The Big Bad™ will YOUR Team need before winning and defeating them? For some Teams, it could be a shorter run ... for others it could be longer and require more confrontations.

Set the whole thing up as a connected chain (think Task Force/Strike Force) with an open ended number of Missions in it. At the end of each Mission in the Team encounters The Big Bad™ for the story. First time you meet The Big Bad™ in the first Mission there is No Hope of winning ... although there are "endurance" rewards for surviving as long as you can before finally getting wiped. Second Mission you meet The Big Bad™ again ... but this time there is the slightest possible chance of winning (I'm thinking random vulnerability to something specific as a trigger), but will probably wipe again. Third Mission you meet The Big Bad™ again ... but have a slightly higher chance of winning (add another vulnerability?), but still probably wipe again. And so on and so on and so forth ... until your Team manages to score the right combination after sufficient iterations to eventually defeat The Big Bad™.

That way, you don't have a "The Good Guys Win Every Time" dynamic going on. Instead, you develop a dynamic of "You'll Lose At First, But If You Persevere You'll Eventually Succeed" dynamic that builds on a what doesn't kill you only makes you even more embittered and resentful sort of journey for your Team ... until finding success.

The "challenge" then is to figure out how quickly your Team can pull together in order to win somewhere down the line, rather than the first time out. Bragging rights go to being able to finish quickly, with fewer iterations of The Big Bad™ (meaning they're stronger when you succeed). At the same time, you're also purposefully designing what amounts to an Ironman Challenge in which the Team needs to "carry on" until they can finally succeed.

In other words ... invert the usual dynamic of Winning and Losing. The "story" for all of this would be a Losing Streak until finally managing to score a Win, which then ends the storyline for the Mission chain and "solves" the whole thing. Set it all up to run on a Random Missions basis (like a Newspaper or a Police Scanner) and just progressively weaken The Big Bad™ appearing at the end of every Mission until the Team can overcome the challenge successfully. Design it to be completely open ended with no set, pre-designed point of resolution baked in. That way it's an Endurance Test to finish it, rather than a scripted sort of deal with a set endpoint.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
This dynamic can work with a

This dynamic can work with a little tweaking.
If the no win scenario at the beginning doesn't send you back to your usual respawn place but keeps you in the mission, then you wake up still in the same story, and there is an in game reason why the unbeatable villain is now beatable, that's cool.
The 2 most likely reasons for the villain being beatable are:
1) Something happened while you were out that weakened him.
2) once you wake up you learn something that lets you beat him.

Without this tweak you have 2 reasons the idea doesn't work:
1) If you just have to keep being beaten until the villain is weak enough for you, then it isn't whatever doesn't beat me makes me stronger. It's just eventually he'll be wimpy enough even for us. And that's no fun.
2) Even without this being an intended design we could get the same experience by doing any mission on too high a difficulty setting. You keep failing until you've either beat all the minions and kept making it back before the mission reset. Or you keep failing until you finally level up enough to win.

You know, come to think of it. Maybe I could get my Good guys always win feeling just by always playing missions on really low difficulty, and only patroling the street in relatively safe areas. After all I'm looking for relaxing fun not a major challenge.
Then when I do feel like a challenge I can just turn the difficulty back up or go into some more dangerous zones.

Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 3 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
I know that in some games

I know that in some games there are situations were you are MEANT to lose to progress the story. Granted, this is just part of the story line and in the long run you will win the game (complete it), but failure is just part of the over reaching story.

Final Fantasy springs to mind here... I forget if it is 4, 5, or 6 but they have used the "big bad defeats the party" as part of the story line.

Side note: I only remember this because I watch speedruns of the games being played, and I remember the people playing the game bringing this fact up... it is amazing how many people *try* to win the unwinnable first time through (I know I have done this many times myself) and then reset automatically *the instant* they lose... load up the save and try again.

Nintendo hard springs to mind... although in this case, if they just waited a few seconds the story would have progressed for them (and me) before I had to go to do something and game back to the game progressing....

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Paladin, the basic idea is

Paladin, the basic idea is that Team Wipe results in Mission Failure (and I'm thinking a "free" trip to the Hospital so as to not penalize unfairly). Go back to Contact, get next Mission and try again. It literally is a "try until you succeed" setup in which the goalposts are designed to move closer until you can make the kick. WHEN that will happen (and WHY) are not pre-determined, but are a matter of "letting the chips fall where they may" until something clicks together for the Team and then they manage to pull off what was previously impossible.

Rationales for why The Big Bad™ slowly becomes vulnerable would rest on the "learning from failure" route, rather than from the "weakening" route.

And yes, it sounds like in order for you to get your Good Guys Always Win™ feeling you're just going to be playing an All Grey To Me game ... unlike the rest of us.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
TheMightyPaladin
TheMightyPaladin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/27/2014 - 18:25
OK then I'm afraid it's a bad

OK then I'm afraid it's a bad idea. Sorry
As for me. I think green and blue are OK, Even occasionally Higher colors but when I get to places where everything is red or purple I'm in the wrong place.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

...but when I get to places where everything is red or purple I'm in the wrong place.

Well, unless you're a tricked-out Incarnate and you have a synergistic buddy with you. Then the two of you can treat (small) groups of reds and purples to a proper beat-down. Have Fun!

Be Well!
Fireheart

Gluke
Gluke's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 5 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/05/2014 - 06:36
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Hey GLUKE, I hope this explains what I meant on the terrorism thread, so you can understand that I don't have anything personally against you, it's just that we want different kinds of games and what you want seriously hinders my ability to get what I want, in the same game.

I'm OFFENDED!!!!! Shut this mother down now!!!

"TRUST ME."

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 weeks ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Redlynne wrote:
Redlynne wrote:

I'm going to throw a monkey wrench here. Okay. Everybody ready?
{...}

*dons full baseball catcher getup* Ok, ready.

Quote:

What about scenarios that are written and designed in such a way that the first attempt (by the Heroes, duh) ALWAYS FAILS ...?
I'm not talking stuff like you wake up Reichsman and he SMITE!™s you with the Power Of Plot Armor. No, I'm talking about scenarios where the design intent is to Wipe The Team in straightforward combat the first time out ... EVERY TIME the scenario gets run.
Now I know that there are a lot of people immediately shaking their heads and muttering "well how is THAT fair?" already. Just hear me out, I'm not done yet.

As long as it's limited to a few specific scenarios then it could be successful. Not sure I would do more than just a "try it out" run but that depends more on the implementation than the concept.

Quote:

So the first time your Team goes up against The Big Bad™ they mop the floor with your Team and it is a pure No Win Scenario. The Design Intent from the outset is that the first run against The Big Bad™ is the classic Impossible Mission ... because it is designed to be Impossible ... full stop.
.
.
.
In other words ... invert the usual dynamic of Winning and Losing. The "story" for all of this would be a Losing Streak until finally managing to score a Win, which then ends the storyline for the Mission chain and "solves" the whole thing. Set it all up to run on a Random Missions basis (like a Newspaper or a Police Scanner) and just progressively weaken The Big Bad™ appearing at the end of every Mission until the Team can overcome the challenge successfully. Design it to be completely open ended with no set, pre-designed point of resolution baked in. That way it's an Endurance Test to finish it, rather than a scripted sort of deal with a set endpoint.

Hmm, not sure I like it being completely random in what weaknesses he gets in each iteration so I would suggest that at least some of these scenarios are built so that you can go for specific targets (like an artifact the boss draws power from) between each iteration and thus get a specific weakness. Meaning you can device an "optimal" order to gain the weaknesses that is based on the teams composition, giving it a higher tactical feel. I also feel these specific ones will have a higher bragging rights for number of iterations since you can plan it completely from the start, compared to having a significant element of luck that would be in the others.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
blacke4dawn wrote:
blacke4dawn wrote:

As long as it's limited to a few specific scenarios then it could be successful. Not sure I would do more than just a "try it out" run but that depends more on the implementation than the concept.

Well, as I mentioned, this would be the story structure for something akin to a Task Force/Strike Force, so ... already ahead of you on that one.

blacke4dawn wrote:

Hmm, not sure I like it being completely random in what weaknesses he gets in each iteration so I would suggest that at least some of these scenarios are built so that you can go for specific targets (like an artifact the boss draws power from) between each iteration and thus get a specific weakness. Meaning you can device an "optimal" order to gain the weaknesses that is based on the teams composition, giving it a higher tactical feel. I also feel these specific ones will have a higher bragging rights for number of iterations since you can plan it completely from the start, compared to having a significant element of luck that would be in the others.

Again, this gets down to how you structure things under the hood.

Doing a "completely random weakness" each time would involve something akin to having a table recording each and every single Affects Foes Power that PCs can have and then just randomly rolling on that table to determine which (one) Power from that list now gets to do its Full Effect instead of Minimal Effects on The Big Bad™ next time around, and simply adding to that with every iteration. Obviously such a Free Form Random would be biased in such a way as to "pick weaknesses" that the Team is not capable of exploiting (simply because no Team will ever have EVERY attack Power available to them).

So the next step in design from that would be to procedurally generate a table (at the beginning of each Mission in the chain?) that records all of the Affects Foes Powers of everyone on the Team ... so Damaging as well as Debuffing and so on ... and from that smaller list of "what could be used" inside the Mission, randomly select one of the Powers that will affect The Big Bad™ (in the NEXT Mission after this one). Rig it so that identical Powers from different PCs have different entries ... meaning that MY Storm Kick doesn't equate to YOUR Storm Kick, and so on.

If you want to "bias" the possibilities for random selection of which Affects Foes Power will be chosen to weaken The Big Bad™ against, there are two possible criteria I can think of.

One would be the obvious "is this Power successfully used against The Big Bad™" during the current Mission? Any Powers that get used gain an extra entry on the table for the random roll of which Power is The Big Bad™ weak against next time.

Another would be a Survivor's Bias in which whoever was the last PC to be defeated when the Team wiped, all of THEIR Affects Foes Powers get an extra entry on the table for the random roll of which Power is The Big Bad™ weak against next time.

That way, you aren't dealing with a "purely random" set of possibilities, which ... let's be honest here ... has the distinct feeling of being "unfair" due to the fact that a "purely random" design means that what Players *DO* while playing the game is fundamentally unimportant. A "pure random" (even if it's actually pseudo-random) in one in which the actions (and tactics and strategies) of the Players are meaningless, simply because there is no Cause And Effect biasing of outcomes.

But ... if the game "pays attention to" what the Team is actually doing ... AND they leverage that to their advantage ... then it's incumbent upon the Players to "play the odds" and strategize in a way that means that what they DO will affect (but not control!) the outcome. In effect, the Players, through their actions, can "weight" the dice that are being thrown, but they can't predetermine in advance what the dice are going to roll each time.

That sense of being able to INFLUENCE without necessarily CONTROLLING outcomes then maintains the variability of the scenario, such that every time you form a Team to play it the outcome will be different. And that, right there, is the heart and soul of Repeatable Content. That you aren't going to be doing The Same Thing™ every single time you play through the scenario. That way, each time you play it, What Will Happen is a question, rather than a certainty. In my mind, that sort of "defined and designed instability" would make for some rather engaging content to play, because each run would be different.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Foradain
Foradain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 21:06
I like this, I think. It

I like this, I think. It has those "rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty." ^_^

Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
Foradain's Character Conclave
.
Avatar courtesy of Satellite9 Irezoomie

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

You know, come to think of it. Maybe I could get my Good guys always win feeling just by always playing missions on really low difficulty, and only patroling the street in relatively safe areas. After all I'm looking for relaxing fun not a major challenge.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Foradain wrote:
Foradain wrote:

I like this, I think. It has those "rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty." ^_^

Thank you.

The trouble with a lot of situations in which the Players "lose" are ones that fall under the "you must output This Much DPS™ or more" in order to succeed, or some other threshold of viability ... and that threshold doesn't really shift if you can't measure up to it. So there's a tendency towards "lose once and you'll lose forever" when playing certain types of content.

The Imperious Task Force could potentially fall prey to this, where the Team just couldn't "get it together" enough to take down either Imperious himself or his "fluffies" to complete the Mission.

The Lord Recluse Task Force could potentially fall prey to this, where if the Team didn't bring just the right combination of Sleep Powers it wouldn't be possible to pick apart the Freedom Phalanx at the end so as to fight them sequentially rather than in parallel.

The Statesman Task Force could also potentially fall prey to this, where if the Team didn't bring the "right" combination of offense/defense/control they'd just wipe repeatedly on the Four Patrons (Ghost Widow and Scirocco especially) before getting trounced repeatedly by Lord Recluse while trying to take down the Pillars.

Hamidon Raids for all intents a purposes "required" having 4 Empaths to buff the raid group with Recovery Aura and Regeneration Aura in order to give everyone survivability for each stage. There also needed to be a minimum threshold of Hold Powers getting thrown on the Mending Mitochondria so as to shut down their Regeneration Aura (allowing them to be defeated). So the raid had "threshold checks" that if you couldn't output more than THIS MUCH, the raid would fail. Same deal with the Lady Grey Task Force and dealing with the Weakened Hamidon ... although that was scaled for a Team instead of a League.

So yeah, a lot of people have the mistaken idea that if you fail (read: team wipe) even ONCE, that means the whole endeavor is a waste of time and should be immediately abandoned. There is no attempt to regroup, change strategies, coordinate better or even learn from the experience. Instead it's just an immediate /ragequit and move on to something else.

Well, if you build a game in which "failure" can be easily equated with "lousy Team" ... then yeah, the game is going to foster the mentality of the Gear Check (even in a game which doesn't "equip gear"). BUT ... if you build a game in which "failure" is merely the first step to eventual success you flip that dynamic around. Now it's the QUITTERS who are the "losers" ... while those with the perseverence to endure and keep fighting are the "winners" (eventually). You just have to Keep The Faith™ until you eventually succeed.

That builds a very different set of expectations and group dynamics, and makes a "statement" about what the Game finds valuable in its Players.

Because it doesn't matter whether you Win or Lose ... so long as you can Play Again.

Wrap that all up in a variable matrix of possible outcomes which aren't predetermined and you've got a challenge that could be interesting to face beyond just the first time. In short, you've got Repeatable Content.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Riptide
Riptide's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 9 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/09/2013 - 07:01
It sounds interesting.

It sounds interesting.
I see it developing to a point where everyone just races to the Big Bad's room and just stands there letting him wipe the team as quickly as possible so they can all regroup and win.
Would there be a way for the game to tell whether a particular group is really trying?

"I don't think you understand the gravity of your situation."

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Depends.

Depends.

Depends on how the whole thing is programmed. Depends on if there's any advantage/reward for "really trying" as opposed to just doing the Lazy Thing.

I mean, I can come up with all kinds of different ideas for encouraging Players to "really try" each and every single time, including weighting the odds towards those who survive the longest and "do the most" in each battle having the highest probability of having their Power(s) "unlocked" to deliver full effect on the next go round. You could even add something to the effect of "each member of the Team must successfully inflict Full Damage in order to defeat The Big Bad™" ... meaning that everyone on the Team needs to have had at least 1 attack power "unlocked" in order to ultimately win in the end. That means No Free Rides (read: power leveling habits) and puts a premium on participation.

So there are ways to tweak things such that "leeching" is less rewarding than participating. The thing is, once you've reached THAT point, you're basically dealing with the meta-gaming of the game.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
WarBird
WarBird's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 9 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/17/2013 - 19:11
Here's an idea. Instead of

Here's an idea. Instead of The Big Bad getting weaker every time, what if the players gain/learn something specific that, when used together allow them to overcome.

So, the first time you fight, upon entering the room they overhear Big Bad say to one of his lieutenants that they must guard the self-destruct button for his 'Escape Mechanism' at all costs. Before he notices your presence and trounces the whole team.

Upon waking, the team gets a "loot screen" (and I despise these in most circumstances, but let me finish) that says essentially "Big Bad has apparently dropped this'"Incredibly Important Object' in the melee. It may help you if you face him again." then you decide as a team or roll to randomly see who wields this item in the next go 'round. Maybe it does incredible damage on a cooldown timer.

You get defeated again. This time there is a 'disgruntled henchman' waiting that offers to give you his 'Dohickey of Protection' (that all the henchmen get) so you can free him from servitude (or whatever). Again, you get an item that, in this case, doubles damage resistance for a given length of time. Probably want to give that to the Tank.

Another defeat. This time you 'notice' (via a text screen) that some of Big Bad's armor (or force-field generator, etc.) was heavily damaged in the last fight. You just get that clue, and literally have to look for the gap that has appears in the next encounter.

Now you're armed with all this specific gear and while your new suped-up tank is battering away, and your Blaster is doing extra damage directed at the newly revealed weak spot, (along with everyone else) Big Bad realizes that he's in trouble and tries to retreat to his 'Escape Mechanism.' The doors close and he taunts the team as the mechanism begins to pull away. But wait! what is that red button that began flashing when the doors closed? Quick! Hit that button before he gets out of range!

Aaaand you all get to watch the 'Escape Mechanism' get destroyed in a glorious fireball.

This scenario is pure writing and scenario design. It doesn't disrupt the meta game or require any mechanical savvy on the player's part to succeed, but does press on the frustration button a little bit. Of course, once you realize that it's all just one extended mission, the gloss may come off quickly, but That may be the case with anything like this.

Oh, and just for completeness sake; the 'items' get divided up if you're a team. the soloist would just get all the stuff themselves. This also presumes a little bit of 'team scaling' inherent in the mission generator.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
I wasn't thinking in terms of

I wasn't thinking in terms of "debuffing" The Big Bad™ so much as "unchecking the checkboxes" on The Big Bad's™ "invulnerability" to the attacks of the Team. So in the beginning, all the Team can do is "plink" for -1 per hit ... but then when the "unlock" for specific Powers takes place, those Powers can be used at full effectiveness against The Big Bad™.

Clearer?


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
WarBird
WarBird's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 9 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/17/2013 - 19:11
I understood your concept,

I understood your concept, Red.

I was looking for a mechanism that didn't arbitrarily and artificially gimp the players. That's been labeled a no-no in a few other threads already. So, giving the players full use of their powers, but ACTUALLY tearing down their opponent's invulnerability step-by-step makes more sense to me than gradually re-gaining the powers they had when they walked in. See, every time they are defeated they are presented with another avenue to victory that makes sense from a story standpoint. I also think it would be more encouraging after an initially staggering defeat.

Further, having the hero realize/notice/remember a fatal flaw or weakness of the villain, after getting the bejeezus whooped out of him, is a legitimate and time-honored mechanism. Most folks familiar with almost any action film, EVER, will recognize it and follow along.

SeewhutImean? :D

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Yeah, I do ... but at a

Yeah, I do ... but at a certain point, the differences become semantic, meanwhile (under the hood) there can be game mechanical reasons to keep things simpler. From a programming standpoint, it's easier to enforce a "plink or plunk" mechanic onto what the PCs are doing than it is to enforce a "plink or plunk" mechanic onto the NPC in some form or fashion. Not saying it can't be done ... just haven't thought of a KISS way of doing it yet.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 weeks ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
WarBird wrote:
WarBird wrote:

I understood your concept, Red.
I was looking for a mechanism that didn't arbitrarily and artificially gimp the players. That's been labeled a no-no in a few other threads already. So, giving the players full use of their powers, but ACTUALLY tearing down their opponent's invulnerability step-by-step makes more sense to me than gradually re-gaining the powers they had when they walked in. See, every time they are defeated they are presented with another avenue to victory that makes sense from a story standpoint. I also think it would be more encouraging after an initially staggering defeat.
Further, having the hero realize/notice/remember a fatal flaw or weakness of the villain, after getting the bejeezus whooped out of him, is a legitimate and time-honored mechanism. Most folks familiar with almost any action film, EVER, will recognize it and follow along.
SeewhutImean? :D

To me, Red's "system" makes more sense if the boss is supposed to be invulnerable to damage, that is that you can't actually damage him, and each rounds make you learn something (or do something) and thus actually be able to damage him.
Compared to your explanation where you seem to advocate that the boss be "invulnerable" by just jacking up health, regen, defense and damage and then having the players get items/knowledge to become much more powerful than normal before being able to take him down.

Unless you're arguing that the actual damage numbers are relevant to this it's mostly a semantic argument. However, from a mechanics, and somewhat lore, point of view I think Red's system would be more sensible in that if it based on what one player learns then they would share that knowledge with the rest of the team as to maximize the benefit of said knowledge.Of course, there can still be individual buffs that compensate/negate certain effects/buff/ on the boss but those should be the exception, not the rule imho.

Gorgon
Gorgon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 4 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 05/15/2014 - 11:46
Gangrel wrote:
Gangrel wrote:

I know that in some games there are situations were you are MEANT to lose to progress the story. Granted, this is just part of the story line and in the long run you will win the game (complete it), but failure is just part of the over reaching story.
Final Fantasy springs to mind here... I forget if it is 4, 5, or 6 but they have used the "big bad defeats the party" as part of the story line.
Side note: I only remember this because I watch speedruns of the games being played, and I remember the people playing the game bringing this fact up... it is amazing how many people *try* to win the unwinnable first time through (I know I have done this many times myself) and then reset automatically *the instant* they lose... load up the save and try again.
Nintendo hard springs to mind... although in this case, if they just waited a few seconds the story would have progressed for them (and me) before I had to go to do something and game back to the game progressing....

The third time I played KotoR II, i was sufficiently powerful to defeat the zombie Darth guy in the first encounter, in the old Sith academy, which you are supposed to lose. I had to laugh when the game made me run away.

Later you fight him a second time, defeating him many times before he gives up as hopeless. In this encounter, I was two-shotting him every time, just missing one shots. With a few retries I am sure some good crit roll would polish off that sliver of health from the first shot.

Speaking of undefeatable-by-design, as for CoH, one of my bucket list goals at the end was soloing as many AVs as I could in mission chain-ending missions, on +4/+8. (Got Nemesis, BTW, and some honking demon thing and several others. 800k points.) I had intended to fire up the Reichsman strike force (on normal) and solo my way to the mission where you are supposed to fight him, realize he is invulnerable, and flee.

Except I wanted to see if I could at least fight him indefinitely. This means without needing inspirations or one-use powers, and long enough to go through several cycles of haste and other slow-recycle-but-powerful powers, things which can guarantee life for a limited time.

Never got there :(

__________________

The very existence of the taunting tank irritates, for it requires idiotic AI that obeys the taunt.

Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 3 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
blacke4dawn wrote:
blacke4dawn wrote:

WarBird wrote:
I understood your concept, Red.
I was looking for a mechanism that didn't arbitrarily and artificially gimp the players. That's been labeled a no-no in a few other threads already. So, giving the players full use of their powers, but ACTUALLY tearing down their opponent's invulnerability step-by-step makes more sense to me than gradually re-gaining the powers they had when they walked in. See, every time they are defeated they are presented with another avenue to victory that makes sense from a story standpoint. I also think it would be more encouraging after an initially staggering defeat.
Further, having the hero realize/notice/remember a fatal flaw or weakness of the villain, after getting the bejeezus whooped out of him, is a legitimate and time-honored mechanism. Most folks familiar with almost any action film, EVER, will recognize it and follow along.
SeewhutImean? :D

To me, Red's "system" makes more sense if the boss is supposed to be invulnerable to damage, that is that you can't actually damage him, and each rounds make you learn something (or do something) and thus actually be able to damage him.
Compared to your explanation where you seem to advocate that the boss be "invulnerable" by just jacking up health, regen, defense and damage and then having the players get items/knowledge to become much more powerful than normal before being able to take him down.
Unless you're arguing that the actual damage numbers are relevant to this it's mostly a semantic argument. However, from a mechanics, and somewhat lore, point of view I think Red's system would be more sensible in that if it based on what one player learns then they would share that knowledge with the rest of the team as to maximize the benefit of said knowledge.Of course, there can still be individual buffs that compensate/negate certain effects/buff/ on the boss but those should be the exception, not the rule imho.

Reichman TF anyone?

Could you actually *defeat* him without using the beam?

But then again, this is something that can happen in raids in other games (the "You have to do X to be able to hurt the big bad" style of gameplay).

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Nos482
Nos482's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/25/2013 - 14:50
TheMightyPaladin wrote:
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Anyone want to join a Heroes only SG ... I'll call it THE KNIGHTS OF SAINT GEORGE.

Oh yeah? Well, then I'll start VETD, Villains for the Ethical Treatment of Dragons!

RottenLuck
RottenLuck's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/05/2012 - 20:32
TheMightyPaladin wrote: I
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

I mean, I know there are players who don't care which side they're on and just want to look cool, but are there really players who would be content to lose over and over?

I mean, I know we all played that way in the early days of video games. Defeat was inevitable in every in game. It was just a matter of how much you could get done before you died,
but does anyone still play that way?

I would say yes to this. I spent Hours even days making characters in CoH and never got them past level 5. I have also made villains just to play the bad guy for someone else. True that includes Roleplaying but yes I made them to loose.

As for people playing games where defeat is inevitable well, there is XCOM the originals and the Remakes all of them have "Impossible" difficulty where you will loose. So much so that the new XCOM 2 game story has it in cannon you lost XCOM. There are also the DARK SOULS games that are said to be extremely hard. I'm sure there are other games out that the same. Heck, even the simple games like my Phone has Plants Vs Zombies 1 & 2. They have an ENDLESS game mode where you will LOOSE it's the challenge to see how far you can get. So I can say there are those who do play games where winning isn't possible.

Now for the Chaotic Good / Chaotic Neutral view!

Face it I play an Undead Zombie thug as my main I'm not the Lawful Good type. Both City of Heroes/Villains and City of Titans isn't just the "GOOD vs EVIL" stories. Even Comics aren't the black and white even back in the day of the Comic Book Must be safe for kids. You had Rogues like Catwoman who is a crook, killer, and in the bad girl type at the same time she often helped Bats as much as been a threat. The best Villains in comics see themselves as Heroes. Doctor DOOM Wants to fix the world, He the only one who he can trust to run it and he does need to take over... Then you have Magneto who wants to protect the Mutant race from the same thing he saw when his Jewish family were murdered during the Holicost.

Then you have the Anti-Heroes your Punishers, Deadpools. Good yes, but really are they good? Like Deadpool said in his movie "We are bad guys just we are the less bad guys who take out the Really Bad guys."

City of Titans going to have more Gray as well. With the Lawful, Violence, Honesty. alignment system. So it could technically (Depending on skilled writing) to end up with a Lawful Villain. The type of person like Professor Umbridge from the Harry Potter stories. Within the Law but clearly Evil in nature.

That said yes most stories we do have the nature to see the "GOOD" win over the "Evil". I say Most because there are sometimes when we don't. Horror stories are an example heck I remember Jason and Freddy Toys! It got to the point where we cheered when a character we didn't like gets Offed. There are games where we do play the "Villain" or the not so good. Infamous, God of War, and even Grand Theft Auto lets players enjoy the darker said of our nature. I even ran into My Little Pony with Murder, death, gore, and Torture a prime example is Cupcakes.

Should Good always win? Lets, ask Gwen Stacy... oh wait her neck is broken. Well Spiderman did stop the Goblin so I guess he won.

-------------------------------------------
Personal rules of good roleplay
1.) Nothing goes as planned.
2.) If it goes as planned it's not good RP

RottenLuck
RottenLuck's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/05/2012 - 20:32
Fireheart wrote:
Fireheart wrote:

TheMightyPaladin wrote: ...but when I get to places where everything is red or purple I'm in the wrong place.Well, unless you're a tricked-out Incarnate and you have a synergistic buddy with you. Then the two of you can treat (small) groups of reds and purples to a proper beat-down. Have Fun!Be Well!
Fireheart

Heck, The Brute Street Justice/.Willpower Rotten Luck I was doing missions at max difficulty set for 8 members. I was seeing nothing but Red and Purple swarms and loved it! Even before I got Incarnate my Brute Build was nearly unstoppable. Took a long time to fight but I just wouldn't go down. That was the point of playing a Zombie after all, I had Regen and Recovery as high as I could. Even ended up with three self Rez. Only two things really got me, dark powers and toxic. Dark due to me just missing and the fight kept on going and going. Toxic hindered my recovery so my defences will eventually drop. Maybe Ice powers... didn't really test those against Rotten Luck.

-------------------------------------------
Personal rules of good roleplay
1.) Nothing goes as planned.
2.) If it goes as planned it's not good RP

Gorgon
Gorgon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 4 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 05/15/2014 - 11:46
Incarnate made quite a

Incarnate made quite a difference to your toughness. I cloned my tricked out incarnate thugs/traps MM on a second paid account I created, but she necer measured up without the incarnate.

I cloned all the powers and slotting and special IOs and whatnot, over a billion spent to do this. She could not solo +3+8 much less +4+8.

I used her as another 6 pets to drag through missions with my main. :)

__________________

The very existence of the taunting tank irritates, for it requires idiotic AI that obeys the taunt.

Gorgon
Gorgon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 4 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 05/15/2014 - 11:46
Incarnate made quite a

Incarnate made quite a difference to your toughness. I cloned my tricked out incarnate thugs/traps MM on a second paid account I created, but she necer measured up without the incarnate.

I cloned all the powers and slotting and special IOs and whatnot, over a billion spent to do this. She could not solo +3+8 much less +4+8.

I used her as another 6 pets to drag through missions with my main. :)

__________________

The very existence of the taunting tank irritates, for it requires idiotic AI that obeys the taunt.