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.
Do not want.
I think friendly NPC's serve great purpose in PvE (and PvP) but frankly if there's a story to be told with another player I don't want it substituted by an NPC player. (Yes I'm one of those people who advocated socialization over solo play at every turn as it's not just better for the player (to have a social group) but it's also good for the game.)
People who play MMORPGs to solo perplex me. There's a whole system full of players. If you want a partnership I think it's healthier to have a Player than an NPC.
When it comes to playing the "damsel in distress" that's a great place for an NPC (as no player wants to play as a useless NPC)
Crowd Control Enthusiast
In my situation (not being able to play at normal times and so on) it would make the game better. I can see you're point too. I wouldn't want it to be a mandatory thing but more options are always nice.
"Gotcha!"
Team up for task force and raid like content? Sure (though some people could solo some TFs in CoH and loved the challenge). But one reason to solo (there are many) is to experience the meta-story at one's own pace in some fashion that doesn't appear like a random blitz of instanced missions to rack up XP as quickly and efficiently as possible. People who don't get that somebody may want to solo on occasions in an MMO perplex me. Even CoH eventually acknowledged solo content with side switching.
But usually, the price the soloist paid for this behavior in CoH was they were presented with a much tougher row to hoe. Sometimes, as was the case with certain simultaneous glowie clicks, it was impossible. The idea that a successor MMO might actually do something like a personal sidekick to maybe level the playing field even a little is novel. But since this runs contrary to the whole "socialization" movement that remains in vogue to those calling the shots, I don't see it happening.
I'm a strong advocate for playing MMOs socially with other human players. But I'm fully aware there are plenty times when playing solo is either more desirable of frankly unavoidable. The idea that you MUST play MMOs with other players 100% of the time because it's somehow subjectively "healthier" is simply impractical and borderline nonsensical.
Having said that I would only be in favor of the OP's Sidekick idea if it was specifically limited and properly balanced. If it became too easy for anyone to have such a Sidekick then everyone would have one because it would end up being silly not to have the extra firepower all the time. The entire playerbase would effectively have their own combat bot following them around.
As it turns out I actually suggested something like this NPC Sidekick idea years ago back on the old CoH forums but my version was strictly non-combat oriented. I think it'd actually be pretty cool to have an NPC pet that was fully customized by the costume creator (just like a PC would be) but have it follow me around like any other non-combat pet. This would probably be the only way a "Sidekick" pet could be justified in any form.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
With just the single server finding people at odd times becomes much easier. I can speak from first hand experience when GW2 went to the mega-server for PvE.
-----------------------------------------
I never set anything on fire accidentally!
The Titan Legacy - Defender of the Inner Flame
I think a SWTOR-style sidekick/companion would have to be a Power Pool, or even a Secondary Powerset.
Be Well!
Fireheart
When Marvel Heroes brought out the sidekick system it only further killed any chance of actually teaming with other players (the game has had abysmal social structure from jump)
Crowd Control Enthusiast
Thank you for understanding. I think we can safely remove the word "borderline" -- the original argument sounds to me like the claims extroverts make when they insist that introverts should conform to their world view. There's plenty of evidence to show that forced socialisation can actually be harmful to introverts.
However, I also agree with your point that almost everyone would end up with a sidekick bot. Seems to me SWTOR is a good example of this. I don't think I'd like to see CoT go down that route, personally. I always accepted the challenge that some content was gonna be a lot tougher if I chose to go it alone.
Spurn all ye kindle.
I don't care whether combat Sidekicks like this can "kill" teaming or not. That's not actually the real problem with this so your attempt to turn this topic into a "soloing is bad for MMOs" rant is tangentially useful at best.
The real problem is that if everyone could have a combat-capable Sidekick then EVERYONE would have one regardless if they're teaming or not because again it would be dumb not to. Instantly the Devs would have to re-calibrate all content to account for the fact that all "players" running around are effectively mini-masterminds with at least one combat pet in tow. Player teams would by default be at least twice as big requiring twice as many MOBs to remain challenging. It's an escalation that would in the long run be bad for ALL players regardless if they team or not.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I just assumed the op meant step one check if going solo and step two if yes offer the option of an npc sidekick to mitigate some of the disadvantage of going it alone.
If CoT were set up so that these combat-capable Sidekicks could only be out while you're not officially teamed then that "might" help balance them. But I suspect there would be plenty of open world situations where an informal group of players could work together (each with their Sidekicks out) to exploit the situation for farming/camping or whatever.
Unlike many games out there CoH (and presumably CoT) was actually very well geared and friendly for solo play. I understand there may be some legitimate need to have a "Sidekick" for soloing in some of those other games, but I honestly don't think the pros would outweigh the cons here.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I can certainly understand your point of view Lothic and would interject two comments. (1) A solo only NPC sidekick need not be combat-capable (what about a buffer/debuffer only?) and could be unavailable in open world situations (or any situation other than a solo instance). And (2) As far as CoT's "friendlness" for solo play goes let's make a wager. You light out with a full team blitzing missions (or the sewers or whatever) and I'll go solo as best I can doing content in order as I receive it. Who maxes out their character first? I'll bet on you. Now some would say this is working as intended in a social MMO. And I can certainly see that point of view. Personally I would prefer less of a disparity.
But it probably won't happen because of the "socialization" factor.
CoH was perhaps the most teaming-friendly game ever. Other games add ways to solo [b]because they have to because teaming is clumsy and difficult[/b].
I wouldn't go looking for ways to cater to solo play per se as that defeats the purpose and greatest fun factor of games like this -- team play.
EverQuest now has personal sidekicks for every class, and they are roughly as badass as a necromancer's pet. The game is a cold, sterile place.
__________________
[IMG]http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll38/Gnurl/a72b7fba-8da2-4ac8-8e18-0f8453f7d3ee_zpscc5b27b5.jpg[/IMG]
The very existence of the taunting tank irritates, for it requires idiotic AI that obeys the taunt.
When I use the phrase "combat capable" in this context I mean a pet that can affect ANYTHING in a combat situation, including passive buffing/debuffing. Any Sidekick pet that actually helps you play the game would fall into this category. Sorry if that wasn't clear - that's why my Sidekick pet suggestion from years ago was strictly non-combat, period.
If your primary goal in playing a MMO is to get to the level cap ASAP then obviously teaming usually helps with that. If your main goal is to have a good, non frustrating solo-game experience regardless of leveling speed then having a game that is "solo friendly" is better than not. However if your idea of a good time is to get to the level cap of a MMO as quickly playing solo as you could get there with a team, well then, you're going to probably be SoL with almost EVERY MMO out there. Besides one could make the point that if you're soloing why would you bother comparing your progress to other players anyway?
Obviously your definition of a "solo friendly" MMO is different than mine. *shrugs*
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
@Lothic, I understand your logic of parity and share it.
But I also see the lack of social engagement as an issue. I understand it's not one you share but it does not invalidate my concern.
Crowd Control Enthusiast
The theory that combat capable Sidekick pets could introduce game imbalance (by forcing the Devs to have to account for everyone using them in all situations) is something that can argued in discrete cause-and-effect terms. The consequences of this would affect both teamers and soloers alike so there's no need to drive a wedge between the two types of players.
I only discount the "it will hurt teaming" argument because it seems far more subjective and/or intangible, not to mention that it's based on the questionable bias that soloing is something to be considered "bad" to begin with. Let's put it this way: I don't think these Sidekick pets would suddenly encourage team-minded MMO players to all start playing solo. At worst (at least from what I gather is your point of view) it might only motivate the subset of players who are going to play solo anyway to continue soloing. If they were going to solo anyway, why would you care?
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Soloers are going to Solo.
Groupies are going to Group.
Combat Ready sidekicks
Sidekicks just need one of those scaled down Trittionary sets
a Basic Brawl power and a Travel power.
If they are not supposed to be significant reduce damage to 25%
does not generate aggro, and enough hit points and damage resistance that they are not a pain to summon
Formula is repeated in quite a number of games.
If significant just increase damage tom 50%b and generate aggro
when counting as heroes generally the sidekick is referred as 1/2 a hero.
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/18.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
[URL=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-knhgv6lgbrs/UA_riCKAHNI/AAAAAAAATxE/u-sgh23bZhc/s640/wonder_women_by_penichet-d47up0l.jpg [/IMG][/URL]
I wonder if there is a limited selection of pets planned to be available in the tertiary pools. If there are, then those pets could easily fit the bill of 'Side-Kick' assuming they have a customizable costume.
Stalkers don't die: They simply... Disappear.
In CoH most classes could solo already. Remember you were intended to be significantly more powerful than the average bad guy because, hey, you were a superhero. You attacked groups of 3 minions or a minion and a lt.
Controllers who focused on controlling powers early on had a rough go, but they're really a team-based class anyway. The idea of a soloing controller (or defender/healer or tank for that matter) is kind of theoretically odd.
That's why grouping and the mechanisms to find groups [b]and share quests[/b] should not be a slapped-on afterthought, but a well-tested and polished system, with usability testing until it's fast, easy, [b]and intuitive[/b].
Here's an idea -- if a group enters a mission held by one person, or sets it as the goal for the group, it is auto-shared to everyone (popup to accept or not, someone might not for whatever reason). And if you don't accept or have the mission, you still get good xp and drops out of it, just maybe not the full xp or whatever mission reward is.
Stop planning for failure and look to emphasize what makes multiplayer games multiplayer.
__________________
[IMG]http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll38/Gnurl/a72b7fba-8da2-4ac8-8e18-0f8453f7d3ee_zpscc5b27b5.jpg[/IMG]
The very existence of the taunting tank irritates, for it requires idiotic AI that obeys the taunt.
CO and NW have the auto-share on setting a mission as primary, I like that feature. Only problem I can see is when someone in the group is in combat or already talking to a contact, the window should either be separate from the existing contact window, or popping up after the other window is closed or the combat is over. Maybe a telltale to let the recipient know he has another incoming call...
Thinking about it, that should be the case on manual sharing of missions, as well.
Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
[url=https://cityoftitans.com/forum/foradains-character-conclave]Foradain's Character Conclave[/url]
.
Avatar courtesy of [s]Satellite9[/s] [url=https://www.instagram.com/irezoomie/]Irezoomie[/url]
All in all a sidekick would be fairly worthless if it wasn't combat oriented. Give the choice of 3 or 4 generic UI interfaces, -example tank, heal\buff, damage. Set it to retard you're progression by a couple levels. Where as not completely dependant on you're sidekick but it will be able to help you through the times ya need em. I completely understand you argument about the social aspect of the game, and coh was very forgiving with that. I still cannot count the times a "lerroooyyy" blaster jumped into the middle of a mob at low level and caused an entire team wipe because people didn't understand thier roles. Just an idea for the devs that wouldn't be hard to implement, cause face it I'd rather team with 2 other mature gamers and 3 generic sidekicks than loose 2 hours of play progression to the blaster who had to fire his nova off.
"Gotcha!"
I proposed something like this in another thread. My thought was that you essentially selected "Sidekick" as your secondary power and used it like a Mastermind with a single pet. Basically creating a Super-Hero mini-team as your character. You don't get more powers or more attacks, you just have a different focus from which they are deployed. It's just a way to bring a bit more creativity to the creation of a character.
I suspect some thought would have to be given to managing cool-down mechanics, etc. for your sidekick. But I don't see a huge mechanical problem with creating a power set like this in the future.
And of course, you would have much more freedom in designing your sidekick's costume. That would be the majority of the fun of having this kind of character.
ohh... is that like:
[img]https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5031960832/h8C7CDD88/[/img][img]http://i.imgur.com/WZq29b3.png[/img]
You could even do it without making it a power set, let everyone have thier sidekick. Just don't let the sidekick be the star of the show. Plus the being able to create the costume would be awesome. And yeah blasters that go boom tend to piss be off, u less its a controlled precision boom.
"Gotcha!"
I don't see the usefulness of having a sidekick for a secondary at all. It would greatly limit your main character. Think of all the characters in comics that have sidekicks--do any of the main characters not have "secondary" abilities? Someone with a sidekick is usually in the fray with their sidekick, or their sidekick is the one who sits from a distance, aiding their mentor. If the mentor is in the thick of battle, he would most likely need melee/defense primary/secondary. It would be more of a tertiary set if anything. Even sidekicks tend to get their own comic series, so limiting their potential or just making them non-combative seems like a stretch to just squeeze the idea of a sidekick in. Masterminds have a range of pets as a primary set because they're supposed to direct from a distance and plot, so I don't even think they're in the same ball park.
The whole concept of a sidekick in comics is for an inexperienced character to be mentored by a veteran, not controlled like some expendable minion or drone(though sidekicks can be taken advantage of.) Therefore, I think sidekicks would make more sense to be a strictly PC oriented setting. Where a character several levels higher would take a lower character as a sidekick under their wing. Different than CoX's level mentoring system though; an actual binding contract between two players. When the mentor/sidekick are teamed, they both get morale bonuses, and perhaps some sort of circumstantial experience bonuses. The longer their history together, the stronger these bonuses get. It'd have it's own area of statistics and information, and maybe even enhancement slots/clickable powers. I think this would lead to a system with perks and would need incentive for both the sidekick and mentor to begin it. Missions, linked reputation, and other things closed off to non-bound characters. Of course I am 100% for the mentor level system from CoX as well since it sucks when your friends are 15 levels above you in a day because their schedule is more free. Just an idea.
I personally would never want an NPC nor PC sidekick in that instance. I'm just not the mentoring type, but I think if sidekicks would ever be introduced, it should be done right. However, I always dreamed of playing two of my own characters at the same time, and switch between their point of view and powers. This was more of an endgame wish when I had an abundant amount of level 50s. That's just my play style though. I can understand how that can be off putting for people who believe in teaming, but I know a feature like that wouldn't prevent me from teaming.
5 OClock Shadow
"The Five", "Old Scruff", "Wolfbrand", "Tashomono"
Your shaving days are numbered...
i agree
whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster and when you look into the abyss, the abyss also look into you, -Friedrich
[img]http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm106/hinata1032/Kitsune.jpg[/img]
Refer to my suggestion for non-multiplayer options here: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/odd-sounding-necessary-non-multiplayer
But the short of it is that I am extremely limited in my ability to play with other people. It's such an arduous chore that I often prefer to play alone. Now, I enjoy interacting occasionally with others, chatting, dancing, showing off each other's characters etc, sure. An active game is a fun game. But having to actually depend on strangers and wait for them and have them wait for me is oftentimes just not fun.
//////************************************************************************\\\\\\
This summarizes my hopes and dreams for CoT. Check it out if you'd like.
I played the game mostly as a builder. I loved to craft amazing heroes and their stories and powers. Yes, playing with others was sometimes fun when I had something fun that I built to show off, but generally, I never played it for the company.
//////************************************************************************\\\\\\
This summarizes my hopes and dreams for CoT. Check it out if you'd like.
I would love a sidekick if only because then I wouldn't have to pay for two accounts to do everything like in CoH.
//////************************************************************************\\\\\\
This summarizes my hopes and dreams for CoT. Check it out if you'd like.
In CoH, I payed for two accounts so I could play two full-on heroes with complimentary powers, stories, costumes, etc. I could get more drops, manage my inventory better, and have my own supergroup. If we do a sidekick system, I would want it to be more like that.
//////************************************************************************\\\\\\
This summarizes my hopes and dreams for CoT. Check it out if you'd like.
I soloed almost as much as I teamed. When ever I could, I played 30-60 minutes soloing before work when no one was on, and I would get a lot accomplished. It had a "personal time" feeling to it. Getting to know yourself kind of thing lol. I absolutely cherished that time. I'd still prefer this span without a side kick.
5 OClock Shadow
"The Five", "Old Scruff", "Wolfbrand", "Tashomono"
Your shaving days are numbered...
One concept that I've suggested - we're not to the point where such things are firmly settled at all yet - is to have the "sidekick" option be a way for players who've reached mid-levels (say 20-25) to send a sort of "free trial" to a buddy and help bring them into the game. Your "sidekick" account would have one character slot for said sidekick character, and some of the content purchased by the primary account unlocked to the sidekick. Things that he would, if he were starting a new account on his own, have to pay for himself. Some free perks and bonuses. Particularly in costume pieces and in content unlocks, so that the duo can look the part of mentor-and-sidekick and can go do content together.
The tricky part of this design would be ensuring that there was content that was level-appropriate for both main and sidekicked character. Well, one of the tricky parts. This isn't necessarily going to be trivial to pull off.
But the idea is to let this be a way to invite your friends to play with you. When their "sidekick" character gets to a certain level, they'll get options to promote out of it and pay a lump sum to keep the perks (probably a discounted rate) they got as a sidekick, and eventually the ability to send out an invite for a new sidekick of their own.
Done right, the "graduation" arc would be something truly special for both mentor and his sidekick.
The central point of this idea, if we can do it, is to help give the community the tools to expand said community.
I must stress, again, however, that this is just one idea, and not a guarantee that we'll go this way. (As you can see from this post, it's not even a wholly complete idea, yet.)
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Ohhhh... this sounds like SMDB with a Master/Slave relationship.
I can hear Madonna singing in the background "Justify My Love" ;)
[img]http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/c9/b2/f0/c9b2f03b9509d0f92d0231e30cdd5c1f.jpg[/img]
Sorry, I'm just Teasing. Hehehhhhhhehehehhehe ;D
Hmmm...would this mean they would not have to buy the game before trying it out in sidekick mode? Cuz the one disadvantage to the B2P model is that I know a bunch of people who won't invest in an MMO till they can try it for a short time. This usually includes me as well, but I've already contributed enough on KS to make it moot in this case.
Spurn all ye kindle.
Note the words "free trial". They wouldn't have to purchase the game if you sent them the offer to be your "side-kick", but instead be given access for free for a limited time.
With regards toward the OP, one of our power planners wants to play around with our Summons sets including the possibility of 1 pet instead of multiple. No guarantee as we'd have to make sure the differences between Less-Pets-Sets and More-Pets-Sets are workable and trade-offs are sufficient without making one ore the other the smart choice because the other is just plain inferrior by any number of comparisons. If it does work, it'd be a way to make your own personal 'side kick' or having your single combat pet.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Thanks for the reply, Tannim. It was the words 'sort of' and the quotation marks around 'free trial' -- both of which implied it would be something other than the standard free trial -- that made me ask. From what you say here, it sounds like it's actually a standard free trial with only the caveat of having to play with a player who has bought the game.
Spurn all ye kindle.
Exact mechanics are not nailed down, hence my use of scare quotes.
My conception of it would be that it's free access to the game (in that SOMEBODY bought a box at some point, but the sidekick's player didn't necessarily), but that the only "perks" the sidekick gets are those the mentor's player has bought for the mentor. He's piggy-backing on whatever level of access the mentor's player has, and won't have more than his one sidekick character slot. When the sidekick reaches a "graduation" level, he'll eventually hit a ceiling on how powerful he can get unless he does graduate.
And graduation will involve becoming a stand-alone PC. Maybe some of the perks from being a sidekick will stay, but others will have to be bought. Perhaps a buy-the-box amount of money will buy the full package of what he was getting as a sidekick, along with unlocking full access as a normal PC.
As you can see, it's still a work-in-progress, but the out-of-game perspective is that it's a way to invite your friends to try the game, to have solid reasons and ways to play with you and share your benefits as a paying player, and eventually to be able to seamlessly join the paying-player community.
Notably, our concept of how to make a flow of Stars from paying players to free players via the auction house will make it possible to play as a sidekick and save up Stars to be able to play the game 100% free-to-you by the time your sidekick graduates. (Others, of course, paid for those Stars, and paid you for things you did in game with them. So MWM still gets its money to support running and developing the game.)
But the idea is basically a "invite a friend" program dressed up in the trappings of super-powered comics tropes.
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Thanks, Segev. It all sounds good to me -- play before buying, but plenty of incentive to buy if you like playing. Especially if you guys do allow the new player to be able to somehow redeem progress made as a sidekick. It actually sounds more interesting than just a free limited account.
I can see why you want to restrict the number of sidekick slots, but I remember when I got 2 friends to try CoH it enticed them mainly because the 3 of us could play together (they both ended up buying the game). Could we maybe have 2 slots each? I can think of several situations where I would want to bring in 2 people at once -- the aforementioned friends as well as some couples with whom I played CoX and who play most games as a couple.
Spurn all ye kindle.
I do like the idea of just having one powerful combat pet instead of an army of weak pets crowding doorways and etc. Sounds like it would be a fun set to play with.
"Gotcha!"
One possibility would be a small but extent cost to buy additional sidekick "slots" in the c-store. Maybe 1/4 or 1/5 of the cost of a box. This would keep the "sidekick" feeling somewhat like a special thing rather than a "super daycare" to hand out at random to people for cheaper game access, but would permit exactly what you propose. It goes from being a free trial to a cheap trial, though, as a consequence. (On the up side, it is priced in Stars, just like everything else, so you can theoretically get it without spending your own real-world money on it if you sell in-game items for Stars to other players.)
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Sounds reasonable. I take your point re: "super daycare" -- we don't want it to go too far down that path, definitely. Especially, as you point out, there's the Stars-from-in-game-stuff option.
P.S. Also loled at "scare quotes" earlier. :-)
Spurn all ye kindle.
I'm hoping that MWM will be able to take care of the pets blocking players issue by the time they go live.
-----------------------------------------
I never set anything on fire accidentally!
The Titan Legacy - Defender of the Inner Flame
The sidekick power could be implemented by a tertiary that focuses on one pet.
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
Currently we do not plan to allow Summons Sets being made into a Tertiary. This may change in the future, the whole 'never say never' thing, for now it is not a consideration.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Well you have to figure out how summons are going to work before you can do anything with them :)
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
Came across this thread when I was thinking of sidekicks. Lots of good ideas and arguments. I had a thought that might put a different spin on this.
How bout a sidekick/minion as a mission requirement?
You do this mission, and at the end of it you have a sidekick/minion thrust on you. Its up to you to protect/exploit this creature for "X" ( X being, for example, 5 other missions, a amount of time in Game Time/Real Time, finding 10 badges, whatever)
This minion may/may not have combat abilities, but is primarily designed to be a burden to the player. (as quite a few comics portray them to be) When this "X" is accomplished, the rest of the mission arc continues. If the sidekick/minion doesn't make it (for whatever reason) the arc does not continue. (possible restart, if the player wishes??)
At the end of the arc, or sooner, the sidekick/minion goes their own way to be a hero (or start their own bid to take over the world) and the player gets a juicy reward for mentoring/dominating the fledgling.
The player may always "Opt-Out" of this mission at the recruitment stage, but will not progress in that arc from that point.
As an aside, the Dev's can make it so that the player can name the follower and even make a costume for them if they wish. Possibly even use them (upon successful completion of the arc) as Easter egg spawns of NPC heroes or as future villains for the game.
They also serve, who only stand and wait.
Wow talk about a necropost. ;)
Anyway I like your general idea of having a "burdensome sidekick" but I probably wouldn't make their survival a requirement to successfully complete any mission/arc. Maybe they could be something you could activate as a manifestation of a XP bonus mechanic - let me explain what I mean by that in the following example.
Let's say you start a mission and decide you want to challenge yourself by adding a vulnerable sidekick that you have to protect/escort throughout the mission. As long as the sidekick is alive you gain say a +10% bonus to XP earnings. Basically by making your job harder (having to keep your sidekick alive) you get a bonus benefit. Technically the Devs could even design this to a permanent, built-in sidekick and let players give it a name/costume. At that point it would be available to use whenever you wanted like a pet. It could live as long as it didn't get killed or you decided to deactivate it. The trick would be if it gets killed in combat it would have a long cooldown period (say like 30 minutes) so that you'd lose the XP bonus benefit if you were careless and let the sidekick die.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
So, what we want is what TOR has, lots of sex slaves running around. Which we'll have plenty of from a lot of players already.
Not so sure this is the best idea.
If sidekicks come I'd like them to be a pet powerset.
One thing I hate in MH2015 is that without a personal pet/sidekick your character is basically gimped. I do not want sidekicks to be a core game mechanic but I support it being available to those who want them (and are willing to trade off combat parity).
Crowd Control Enthusiast
This is not me speaking with any real authority at this point, but one idea I'd had and would like to press for is for "sidekick" to be something that players can unlock after playing a character to a certain level. When they unlock this, they gain a "sidekick account" they can give away to a friend, which will let that friend create their character's sidekick. This will give that sidekick access to some or all of the subscription perks and purchased elements his mentor character can access, open some specialized content to let the two play together while introducing the sidekick's player to the game (a specialized tutorial mode, perhaps), and will allow players to get "trial" access without having to buy the box.
When the sidekick reaches a level such that he could get his own sidekick, he graduates. This makes him lose any inherited perks from his mentor's account, but by now he hopefully will have decided to start up his own subscription package, etc. And he will have a sidekick account to give to a friend...
Anyway, that's the idea I had for it. Whether it materializes is yet to be determined, as there are a number of ideas and we have more basic elements of gameplay and technical design we're currently working on.
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
That just sounds really horrible,
and if that's how it works I will not be getting a sidekick.
For me the whole point to it is to solo easier.
If I still need another player, and that other player has to have a gimped account then there is no reason to bother.
Also the idea of my sidekick eventually "graduating and leaving" is something I don't want to see.
once again why bother investing any of my effort into it?
I realize JayBezz is all totally about making sure we socialize but as far as I'm concerned that is just not going to happen.
I have no interest in teaming up ever.
I will not play any game content that requires teaming
I want to play a game not meet people
Here, a link a thread I started about the subject.
http://cityoftitans.com/forum/sidekick-hangout
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
GTA might be what you're looking for.
Not that I am against soloing. In fact, I think, much like CoH, one should be able to build up their character to solo content, like those who built their characters to solo TFs.
I also think there should be some thing that just can't be soloed. This is where I consider the difference in enemy types.
Archvillain would be tough, but able to be built to be soloed with the right powersets/enhancement/set bonuses.
Giant Monsters...this is what I consider Galactus and Godzilla...not so much soloable even at one's best. These are the grand superhero team up stories!
GTA is not a superhero game and I find the suggestion that I would like it to be seriously insulting.
People telling me I should be playing some other game, are part of what made me quit socializing in games.
They make me feel unwelcome.
I'm fine with the fact that I'm going to miss out on some things by not teaming.
But I seriously hoped a game mechanic that should've helped with soloing (and filling up teams) wouldn't be one of them
and whether or not I want to team, the scheme described above is just objectively terrible.
I can't imagine anyone wanting it to work that way.
I mean seriously, did the devs really not want to allow sidekicks, but felt like they Had to to shut us up?
Did they deliberately come up with the worst way they could to make it work?
Between this and the alignment system, I'm seriously starting to become disenchanted with this game.
It's sad I Was really looking forward to it.
Now, I'm just hoping it won't be too bad.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
I believe, and bear in mind this is my opinion and I'm not trying to speak for anybody else, that the things you keep trying to bring up in regards to the development of CoT, TMP, is more in line with console type games. MMO's are supposed to be designed more around the teaming and social aspect as that is what the name implies. Massively Multi-player Online. I understand your detestation of teaming with other people due to the background history you have provided of your experiences. It deeply saddens me that those experiences have shaped your opinion of Multi-player Online gaming. Others, myself included, have tried to encourage you to give it another go in hopes that you will not be disappointed as you were in your other experiences.
Yes, there will always be some sour apples in the bunch that will make things unpleasant from time to time. Yes, sometimes it is just easier to do things on your own and never have to worry about carrying someone else or listening to others tell you how "teh suxxor" you are. However, there is also a lot of joy in finding the proper people to play the game with that can enhance the gaming experience.
To quote Spock, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
In this case, the few will be the people who want to solo and never team up with anybody ever. So this game has to be designed with the many in mind. Some things that will make soloing easier, will make teaming break the game. It could also make teaming a lot more difficult and frustrating. I think you have a tendency to sometimes get too focused on your wants that you don't see how that could somehow not be beneficial to the greater game design. It sounds really good to you, and you are absolutely right, but it just won't work very well overall for the game. Sometimes I think you think that your opinion is the only right opinion and everybody else is wrong and against you. That is not the case. We all want a great game, unfortunately not every idea everybody has will be able to make it into the game.
I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!
Sidekicks the way I suggested them in the other thread (http://cityoftitans.com/forum/sidekick-hangout) would not have made teaming "break the Game" because the NPC team members could count toward the maximum number of group members. Also I can't see any reason why it would make teaming more difficult or frustrating. As I said part of the reason for it was to make it easier to fill up a team.
In light of this, I think it was very wrong of you to suggest that I'm only thinking of myself.
As for the type of game I should be playing, that's for me to decide and I don't need any help.
I want to play a superhero game with lots of options for customizing my characters and lots of different stuff to do in the game, especially exploring and missions, including perhaps player made missions. I'm also keen to build a base.
Above all I Don't want it to have just one story then the game is over (like Zelda)
Since COH died I tried Champions online and found that the art was too weird, the stories were kind of dumb the crafting was too complicated and the advancement was a pain. I still kept playing until they upgraded the graphics and now it won't play on my computer.
I've never been able to get those Marvel or DC games to work on my computer.
I probably need a new graphics card but right now I just can't afford one and since Dungeons and Dragons still works it's hard to justify it. I was thinking about dropping DDO when this game opens then if I needed a graphics card I'd feel justified in getting it.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
I'm sure someday, NPC contacts will see the number of players on your team and ask if you need Backup for certain AV type missions that are meant for a full team. So Longbow NPC Allies spawn inside the instanced mission too, and when the last NPC Ally is defeated, a new ally group spawns to back you up.
But I dont want this to be the defacto way to play for most... in order to make a higher* profit from the InGame store, Players have to make other players jealous when they buy/get/ etc.. wares. And if everyone is SOLOing, thats not happening.
So 20% of the once jealous players cant be capitalized on 'cause they SOLO more often. :/
This is closer to the mindset I and a few others have as well. Other than perhaps the odd temporary power here and there, we have not planned to implement combat-pets other than the Summons sets we design. One of the very early concepts we have is pet sets designed around different numbers of pets all the way to as small as 1. Now please bear in mind that this is all very early concept stuff and will require a ton of testing, internally and (hopefully) externally in some form of testing environment. But if it proves possible to pull off, we might, and again stress [i]might[/i] be able to create tertiary sets based off the summons.
Its a pretty big if, but if we can, then everyone will have access (if they so choose) to have a pet they can (hopefully) design to be some form of side kick to their character to some degree. Or it may just be that our Summons sets are unique in that they don't show up as tertiary sets if they don't work out.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
I'd prefer if loosing your NPCs meant failing the mission and having to start over.
Unless you had a way to bring them back with your own abilities or finish the mission without them.
I'll confess I'm very seldom jealous of what other players have.
But since I'm poor the only money I'll ever spend on any game is cost of the subscription, sorry.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
Dude, that would be escort missions x11, and people don't like those enough. If anything we need something where they don't stop following you no matter how far away you are and they get a speed boost!! Also why are we talking about this in the sidekick thread?
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
Iduno Izzy brought it up
But it wouldn't be the same as an escort mission,
because they'd be able to actually help you, unlike the useless people you escort,
and you probably wouldn't need ALL of them to finish the mission,
if they held on long enough you might even be able to finish without them.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
Alright I think I get it now...
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
The Devs have already essentially told us that CoT will allow for female Mastermind-type pets. I suspect if there's going to be any flood of "TOR-like sex slaves" then it's going to happen with that already. Adding customizable sidekick pets is not likely going to make the "bad idea" you suggest that much worse.
Sidekicks, no matter what form they take, should be universally available to any player. Limiting them to a specific powerset just makes them a specialized Mastermind thing and at that point why even bother calling them sidekicks? This is one of the main reasons I "re-suggested" again in this thread yesterday the core idea of a sidekick which is essentially a NON-COMBAT pet.
As a pet which could potentially serve a different purpose, like my "get an XP bonus while it stays alive" idea, then it wouldn't become something that would unbalance combat dynamics even if everyone used them. And as a pet that wouldn't ruin combat you wouldn't have to limit it to a specific powerset - it could be a feature every player could enjoy regardless of the powersets they use.
Basically keeping sidekicks non-combat oriented would automatically solve almost all the sticky/questionable implementation problems associated with introducing them into the game.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Like I opened my last post with, it is an idea I had and like. It's a way to invite players into the game without them having to buy the box, give them a trial account and also have a definite hook into the world and the game (hangnig out with/learning from their mentor). It is not by any means settled, and in fact is one of the less likely options to make it, if only because it's one of the more unusual approaches and ... well, let's face it, MMO gamers are a bit conservative when it comes to "new things." They like the familiar. This is not a bad thing; many things are staples because they [i]work[/i].
If "sidekick" is implemented as some sort of universally-available power or power-set, it probably won't be available that way at launch. There are too many other powersets, some of which would have overlap with any "pet"-like sidekick power but would need exclusivity to Classification, that we have in line first. That doesn't mean it won't ever happen in that fashion, but we've got a pretty full plate before we're "ready for launch" already.
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Having played SW:TOR extensively I must caution against having easy access to a companion to help you solo. That game developed hardly any social ties between players, and only shallow ones if it did at all. Players would team up a lot, using some form of group finder, but those teams would be for a single heroic mission or flashpoints. Those teams would fall apart the moment the mission ended and players did not expect to ever meet each other again. As a result the game has a lot of trouble of retaining a player base.
Note that it does not matter if this ease of soloing is a result of adding companions or just plain making the missions easy enough to solo except for a handful of them. In both cases ties between players - which is what keeps them with the game - will be weaker and player retention will suffer.
It is also important to notice that fewer players nowadays have an interest in investing that much time and effort in building up a group of friends and a reputation for themselves. So even acknowledging the dangers of a game that can be mostly soloed, it also is important to realise that without that option fewer players will even want to try a game.
So, from an operational point of view you want to have players team up as much as possible, and not rely on guilds/superherogroups exclusively. But even if teams should be the default you do not want to make it exclsively so. Possibly the best way to deal with all this is to design encounters for e.g. 4 players. When a player signs up for a mission he or she gets assigned 3 story and powerset appropriate companion characters. These companions do take their share of the experience gained, but do not (fully) contribute to the XP bonus, so a solo player can jump right in, but pays for that in a somewhat slower pace of xp gain.
The player can also sign up other players for the mission, and each of them will remove one remaining companion hero that is closest to their powerset and role. Adding players will increase the XP bonus, and once more than 3 additional heroes sign up for the mission the difficulty slider kicks in with a vengeance (as does the XP bonus).
This makes it easy for players to solo or duo without the encounter designers having to compromise on difficulty (they can be certain of 4 roles being present, or players deliberately trying with alternative team makeup), but it rewards players for taking a little time to find a few other players to team up with.
Though I liked the (slightly!) more creative players who had their female Sith Warrior playing 'slave' to their Malavai Quinn companion character.
I agree that both soloing and teaming should have their places in the game,
but automatically fixing us up with a team whenever we don't have one would in effect mean we could never really solo even if we really wanted to.
In Dungeons & Dragons Online sometimes I use a hireling but sometimes I don't, and sometimes I still team with my guild members out of sense of obligation
Also I don't like xp bonuses for teams because why give soloers less reward for greater challenge?
I don't want xp bonuses for soloing either because I don't want to discourage anyone from teaming.
Not teaming is my choice which I make for my own reasons
(mainly I never enjoyed teaming, Did I ever mention that I have Aspergers? maybe I should have)
I don't want the game to reward or punish the behavior and I don't want people who do team to be rewarded or punished either.
Honestly I can't see why the devs can't be neutral on something like this that doesn't effect them at all.
As long as I like the game I'll keep playing
but if the game tries to force me to play in a way I don't like I probably wont like the game.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
Paladin, I think you're getting things a little backwards. The baseline assumption to be made is that players will team, but keep the game solo friendly ... as opposed to the reverse where you assume that players will solo and try to keep the game team friendly. That's because this two way street is not symmetrical in both directions. It's easier to take a team assumption and narrow it down to work for singles than it is to assume singles and then worry (as an afterthought?) about team play.
It's essentially a question of structure and load balancing. The team friendly "base" structure is easier to extend into solo play than it is to do the reverse. The gaming world is littered with Massively [b]Singleplayer[/b] Online Role Playing Games (M[b]S[/b]ORPGs) that turn out the way they do because they were designed on a soloist base with team play tacked onto it (although "kludged" onto it may be a more accurate description, given the realities of gameplay). ESO and TERA have suffered this problem, as well as Tabula Rasa, to a certain extent. Other people have mentioned Star Wars: The Old Republic as being skewed towards a soloist preference, and I'm sure there's more that can be cited as examples of the problem.
The point being that these two approaches to designing content have asymmetrical difficulties in extending into the neighboring sphere. My sense is that it is easier, safer and more prudent to assume Team and allow for Solo rather than doing the reverse.
---
And not to put too fine a point on it, but you're very consistent about placing markers and making demands about the game YOU want to play, accompanied by messages that boil down to insisting the game be tailored to meet your specifications. It's perfectly fine to give your input and share your views on features and design parameters, since that's what these forums are here for. However, the ... unyielding consistency ... of your opposition to anything that doesn't support YOUR style of play is both inherently self-serving (and therefore, selfish) and ultimately counter-productive. The simple fact of the matter is that NONE of us is going to get EVERYTHING that we want out of the game (because you can't please everyone simultaneously). The game isn't going to be everything that I want it to be, simply because that's the nature of the beast. I can help make it better, but I can't (on my own) make it "perfect."
So my recommendation to you, Paladin, is ... stop slamming the entire game as being something you "won't like" (see above post for reference) in unhelpfully broad brushstrokes. It's okay to say that there are certain features that you would prefer to see operate in certain ways, and then engage us in discussion about those features specifically. It's not okay to essentially keep repeating a pattern that amounts to "Well, if I can't have my way then I'll just have to take my ball in."
Also, be mindful that just because we disagree, doesn't mean that those who do not agree with you are out to insult you (personally) or disparage your point of view.
At this point, it is extremely premature for any of us to be saying that if we don't like Feature X then we won't play the game. That sort of absolutism does none of us any favors, especially when it is conveyed in as purely a subjective manner as you have been doing. All I'm asking you to do is to step outside of yourself and ask a more objective question of "What is best for the Game?" as opposed to couching everything in terms of "What is best for ME?" when you formulate your arguments. I say that because a great many of us here are old hands at knowing the difference between these two approaches to problems (mainly since so many of us are Gamers and Game Masters ourselves) and we can spot the self-interest vs the group-interest from pretty far away.
So I'm not asking you to change your mind ... but I am asking you to change your viewpoint, which in turn will create differences in how you engage in discussion with the rest of us. Give it a try. After all, what have you got to lose?
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
One of the benefits of moving files to my new hard drive is coming across old files that tend to get overlooked. One such file I had consisted of notes from chats and old forum posts and it sparked an idea for side kicks. I'll preface this by saying this in no way is something planned and usually I (try to) wait to being such things up in our dev chats at the appropriate time. However I wanted to float it by you all here to get a sense of what our forum going community might think of it.
The sidekick system would be provided by a service purchased with Stars from our cash shop, which allows the purchaser to flag a character from an account to be a sidekick for one of their characters. The sidekick account can be the purchaser's own account or another player's account. Other players would of course have to provide consent. The sidekicked character must be of a lower level than the mentor character.
When the sidekick is a character from the player's own account, or from another player who is off-line a pet copy of the character is made available. Any xp "earned" by the pet is tracked and logged. When the live sidekick character is logged on they will receive this xp as a bonus they can activate at will.
If the sidekick is live and teamed with their mentor unique bonuses can be provided to reflect the nature of the mentor - student relationship. Mentors can earn unique badges which may improve these unique bonuses. A player logging on will receive a notification if their character is in active use as a sidekick. Logging in the actively used sidekick will require a system that tracks the pet version sidekick's current status and apply it to the live version.
Once the sidekick matches / exceeds the mentor character's level the sick kick "graduates" and is no longer a sidekick. A warning would be provided when this is about to occur. The mentor would also receive notification that their sidekick has graduated.
Essentially, this allows a solo player to use one of their own creations as a sidekick at the cost of a character slot, it also can be used socially between players, and it acts as a sort of paid for service for leveling another pc. As a service it provides at least so etching of a stop gap from everyone automatically always having a side kick for every single character.
If possible a unique flag can be used on sidekick npcs to note that they are account-based versions of pcs which in turn counts toward team size for teaming and team-difficulty scaling. Live players take precedence over sidekicks which would be dismissed if the team continues to be filled to max.
How the sidekick npc's AI is controlled is something that will need to be explored. It will probably require a tether to the mentor so it can't be told to sit at one spot while the mentor handles business, so there certain aspects gameplay wise that need to be figured out. It may be that the mentor is given rudimentary versions of our Summons set pets control schema.
And there should be some metric of failure on the mentor's part if their sidekick is being defeated on a frequent / regular basis. What that is and how it affects the sidekick / mentor relationship needs to be determined.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Nice idea, Tannim, but I can spot a few holes. I'll let other people chime in first though.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
Red
Once again you're accusing me of taking a stance I have never taken not once ever
I defy you to produce a quote where I demanded that the game be tailored to me or else.
You wont find one because they don't exist.
There are no credible threats I could make beyond not playing or expressing my disapproval
and I do reserve the right to either of those things.
but even if I express serious disapproval, I've seldom found anything so offensive that I'd consider not playing
I'm more certain that I'll avoid content that I don't like.
like when I said that if sidekicks work, the way Segev proposed, I just wont have a sidekick.
I have made it quite clear that I don't like some things
I have asked made some requests for things I like
That is all I've done
but every time I make a request or say I don't like something you jump in to tell me I'm demanding that the game be tailored to me personally
As I said before I'm really getting sick of it.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
Paladin, I know you didnt intentional try to do any of those things... its just that Red might have felt thats what you were going for. :<
I'm not trying to defend Red, as her tone sometimes feels argumentative at times, but she is trying to smooth out the rough edges.
I think all she wants is a few statements that beging "Maybe we should..." and not so many "We have to..." ;)
Izzy, I might consider teaming with you.
Maybe I won't just close my chat window.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
:D Thats the Spirit!
*I win the forum side bet. I got Paladin to agree to team with me 1st!* :D
What we saw from Masterminds in CoX was that any powerset or other phenomenon whereby the player can control more than one "body" that has HP and endo and attacks makes that "character" really more a "team" unto itself and "they" end up being able to do missions at a significantly increased difficulty and tempo (compared to a solo scrapper, for example) for that reason. Thus, whether or not there's a good role play reason for it, such powers/sets/archetypes end up being more powerful and I think this needs to be addressed. I'm not terribly fond of the idea of giving everyone an NPC sidekick, and I really want to avoid letting the players make those sidekicks themselves. I could see having stuff like CoX did, i.e. the occasional mission where you team up with a native NPC like Faultline and Fusionette, etc, or an AT where you get some amount of pets which pets have powers and so forth designed by the devs. But the idea of letting someone essentially design two toons and play them both at the same time as mentor/sidekick I don't like. I think the synergies you can take advantage of in terms of powers and so forth make that "too good" to allow. Like "I'm a Scrapper with practically NO defensive or healing powers, because I decided to use all my slots on damage output, my sidekick who always stands near me as an NPC is a healer bot that does nothing but heal my reckless butt while I slice through mobs set at +4/x8" Just my opinion.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Most definitely there are holes. I gave as brief a summary as i could while also bringing up the highlights of the idea. If i were to present this to the team there would be a lot more details and of course lengthy discussions on the merits, cons, and feasibility of implementation.
Indeed Radiac brought up a good point of players creating their own personal buff / attack bot which was one of the concerns raised in discussions a long time ago. It will require a lot more structure to the system to make it more likely to work and reduce the efficiency of sk bot syndrome, though at a certain point its rather unavoidable.
Within the context of the idea though is:
1. It costs Stars to set up as it is being considered a service
2. It requires the use of someone's character slot
3. The npc version of the character would have limited functionality and could be set up so that it can't just play "buff mode" and isn't very efficient offensively compared to what the mentor build should be capable of.
4, and it may be moot if we can make worthwhile tertiary sets based off our Summons Primary sets.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
I agree that there should be limits on what a sidekick can be, and I already suggested on the thread I stared on the subject, that the sidekick should always be lower level than the payer. no mastermind sidekicks would make a lot of sense because let's face it you just can't be a mastermind and a sidekick at the same time, and a sidekick just isn't the same as an equal partner
but the abuse you're describing would be just as easy to commit by 2 players working together as by a single player with a sidekick
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
I disagree with TheMightyPaladin on the point he makes above that " the abuse you're describing would be just as easy to commit by 2 players working together as by a single player with a sidekick"
My arguments on this point are these:
First, the argument I made is about not letting to soloists have their cake and eat it too in the sense of having one or more NPC buff/heal bots at their disposal, so as soon as you say "two players could do the same thing" you're really not talking about the "same" thing there, because when you take away the NPC sidekick bot option, you're taking away the soloist's ability to dictate the time and place of the team-ups by virtue of the fact that a warm body has to be awake, logged in, and driving the sidekick toon in such a way as to meet the soloist's demands. Even if you assume the soloist in question has a little brother or indentured servant of some kind that will do as they are told, you're still making the soloist have to recruit that person to capitulate to those demands on their schedule. There are logistics involved in getting any two people together in the same place at the same time, whether that place is a physical location or Titan City. People have lives, etc.
Second, I don't think this ever actually happens, given human nature. I personally would never make a toon that has no chance of ever being able to complete missions against bosses etc solo for the sake of just healing and buffing someone else, because I know I'm going to eventually end up logged on at times when that other person isn't. It's just bound to happen, and not infrequently IMO.
So while it's TECHNICALLY true that two people COULD do the same thing, and probably better, A) I don't think they'd be able to do it nearly so often as a soloist with an NPC can (which is like 100% of the time, if the soloist really wants to) and B) I don't think, human nature being what it is, they ever WOULD do that. I think BOTH people would want to make themselves a toon that works okay all by itself, instead of making a glass cannon and a heal bot tandem.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Actually human nature can be surprisingly cooperative especially when its mutually beneficial.
2 players could each make main characters and support characters and take turns in each role
If they get tired of the arrangement they can do a respec but keep the levels and other rewards they earned together
I've known a lot of people who did it and Frankly they'd be stupid not to.
If they feel like soloing, well, they have more character slots.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
I love the idea of a personal side kick. I do a lot of soloing and a customizable sidekick even with some imposed limitations would be great.
The distinction between two or more active players coordinating their character builds a d playstyles and a si gle player designing a pet to aid their character are fairly large and significant in importance.
Typically when a game provides the inclusion of a combat pet the capability of the player character and the combat encounters as a whole are designed aroind the inclusion of the pet. Some games provide a very limited type of combat pet which act as a very minor effect over time and are fairly easily dispatched. The concepts provided for sidekicks certainly do not qualify as a simple type of pet and therefore considerations for how it could be made possible for this game must be made.
Any pet which is outside the build scope of the pc would therefore require some form of external requirements and extensive structure to the sidekick pet system as a whole.
The simplest solution is to provide the possibility of a combat pet via a tertiary power set based off the summons primary. It would already use existing structures within the game such as customization for appearance and powers, keeping in level difference with the pc, the AI design, and requires the player to design their character's build to inide the summons tertiary over that of other combat powers.
If summons tertiary sets cannot work the we go to the external provisions which i believe the ide i posted covers quite extensively.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
This is what I'm hoping for
either this or the hirelings type thing
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
Wasn't meant to be insulting. I just got the sense from your post that you are against the idea of say "raids" which just shouldn't be soloable.
But then imo, they should have a storyline where it makes sense that many heroes/villains/combo of both need to team up!
Player vs Archvillain or Player vs Archhero (forgot what CoV called them) should be (yes admittedly imo) something one should beable to build towards soloing (like in CoH).
All I'm asking is that you refrain from couching your responses in terms of "My Game" and "How I Play" ... and instead describe your objections more in terms of "Our Game" in a way that is inclusive of more people than just yourself. I'm asking you for a more Objective than Subjective viewpoint for the reasons and rationales of your assertions and objections. That's all. I believe that you're perfectly capable of doing that.
Moving on.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
Tannim, any kind of "full time sidekick" will quickly be turned into a Game Balance Point that divides the Haves from the Have Nots. People with permanent sidekicks will have asymmetrical advantages over those who don't. My concern is that turning this into a potentially "universal" feature carries with it a factor that can destabilize game balance just as permanently.
So let's look at what purpose an NPC Sidekick is intended to serve.
On the face of things, an NPC Sidekick functions in much the same way as an NPC Nemesis for your character would ... they are a recurring character "participating" in the story of the character you are playing. Which makes me think that ideally you'd want to run any kind of Sidekick system off the exact same code base as any kind of Nemesis system (after all, why reinvent the wheel?). The reason for this is that both are NPCs that are "attached" to your character in some way, with the only major difference between them being Loyalty (in the US vs THEM sense).
My notion is that any sort of NPC Sidekick and NPC Nemesis ought to be ... confined ... to somewhat specific storylines and story arcs. Ideally, these would be "recurring characters" who appear for/against your PC with content specifically designed (and therefore, balanced) for the inclusion and participation of these NPCs. For extra bonus points (and replay value?) you could have 4 different "versions" of such storylines and story arcs be possible:
Solo PC
PC + Sidekick
PC + Nemesis
PC + Sidekick and Nemesis
The burden of content creation being what it is, I would assume that not every story arc would have all 4 options developed for it ... but simply having the intent and goal that storylines COULD have all 4 options, and with ongoing development and evolution of the game potentially might realize all 4 options at a future date, would I think be a wise choice for keeping the game relatively open ended. So long as content is created in an [b]Easy To Modify[/b] fashion in the first place, you'd be able to produce Variations On Themes over time as resources permit. That way you don't have to get everything out the door on the first push.
The "baseline" for such stories, of course, would be the Solo PC experience, but if you DESIGN your content for "plug and play" (literally!) additions to that content that permit the inclusion of NPC Sidekicks and NPC Nemesis types as carryover/recurring characters that your PC interacts with ... well ... I'd say you were well on your way to providing the necessary space for a wide variety of playing styles and adventure themes.
I agree with you that any sort of Sidekick and/or Nemesis system ought to be purchased through Stars. I'd even go so far as to advise that such a service be subscription based ... pay X stars to enable access 1 Sidekick or Nemesis for 30 days. If you want both for one character then you're paying double. Sidekicks and Nemesis NPCs would be "bound" to specific characters, although there ought to be an option allowing for the "duplication" of such characters to multiple PCs (you'd just have to pay more Stars for the "privilege" of doing so). That way you can have either a single Grand Nemesis who opposes ALL of your PCs or have a "rogues gallery" of opposing Nemesis NPCs, each one tailored to each of your PCs. Likewise, you could have a single "omni" Sidekick who is loyal to all of your PCs (because of copy copy) or each one could have their own Sidekick who is unique to each PC. Add an "auto renew" feature onto the subscription of the service and you're good to go.
Objections?
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
I used CTRL F to search the page for the terms "my game" and "how I play".
without the quotes
Neither term showed up anywhere outside your post
The word "My" by itself showed up 77 times scattered across numerous posts (4 times in the OP)
and the word " I " appeared 282 times. (I put a space in front of and after it so it would only show when it was used as a word not when it was a letter in a word)
So it's not at all uncommon for people to talk about the game in terms of their own experieces and hopes
really none of us have much more than that to go on.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
Having a Sidekick can work 1 of 2 ways, Player Controlled or Computer AI.
If it is player controlled, then that puts the player with the Sidekick at a huge advantage over the Computer AI NPC. You will have greater control over how the scenario will be played out and will more than likely be able to breeze through the mission with nary a scratch or worry.
If it is Computer AI controlled, then the person who owns the Sidekick will more than likely be extremely disappointed or frustrated with the Sidekick. The reason for this will be that the Computer AI will not do exactly what the player wants the Sidekick to do. It might attack when the Player is wanting a buff, or buff when the Player needs a heal, etc.
Now the argument will be made that the Sidekick can be limited. We can limit it to be able to be attack or support only. Then further limit it by the amount of attacks or support powers it can have. Okay. Now the Player will play the role of the Sidekick and let the Sidekick become the lead role. Basically the Player will then build a Support Character capable of keeping the Sidekick alive while it wades in and starts beating up the bad guys. This way there is no risk to the Player being defeated and losing the mission.
Just look at the differences between a Controller from CoH vs. a Master Mind from CoH. Brutes were not considered the Tank class of the Villain side, Master Minds were. Bots/FF Master Minds were almost the norm when it came to building a Master Mind, unless you were building based on some kind of concept or were just tired of playing the FotM. I'm all for having a class that is much like the Controller from CoH. As long as the AI is not super intelligent enough to make it broken, there is a lengthy cool down for the best pet summon, and the summoned pets have a limited time on the battlefield so that they cannot be made permanent. I'm not a huge fan of Master Mind type characters. I played them. I got really bored with them, really fast. It was just too easy to solo a mission with them while I basically sat back and just kept them alive throughout the whole mission and never did anything unless it was to click on a glowie.
I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!
Seriously, you guys need to play some Dungeons & Dragons Online and use hirelings to see how it works
It's Free to play and we're all just waiting for this game to open anyway.
Yes hirelings are a big help but they're by no means a game breaker.
They're normally AI but they also have a command bar that lets us order them to do things,
Things like:
use some of their abilities
come to us
don't move
interact with objects
and even adjust the settings on the AI so they mostly attack, mostly protect us, or mostly stand around doing nothing until we tell them different.
They have little quirky personalities of their own that show up in the things they say when we give them commands
One hireling named Fergus has earned a reputation for standing still in traps letting them hit him over and over until you call him away or he dies. I love him he's hilarious.
Hirelings Help a lot, but they don't guarantee success by any means
Because I solo a lot, I usually get a Cleric to act as a heal bot.
There are several other options and sometimes I use them
but the hirelings are not customizable at all
Often the hireling gets attacked and can't heal me because he's forced to fight.
Also his ability to heal isn't without it's limits.
This was the Scheme for sidekicks I originally proposed in the other thread I started on this topic
The idea of personal customizable sidekicks kind of hijacked that Idea but I don't think the 2 ideas are mutually exclusive.
Suppose we had a fixed group of sidekick TYPES to choose from (basically one from each class)
we could customize the appearance and name and select a gender
but the abilities would either be preset (including their advancement trees)
or mostly preset so we would have very few choices.
Also never forget that the sidekick would have to be lower level than us
so we couldn't get them until 2nd, 3rd or whatever level the Devs feel is appropriate.
Also remember that a sidekick counts as a team member for most purposes,
including taking a portion of your experience and counting toward the maximum number of team members
so you might not want (or be able) to use them all the time.
In DDO if your team is full you can't call a hireling,
While hirelings might be a great way to solo more easily or fill up a team, they're also just something certain heroes aught to have.
I'm one of those guys who just can't stand the thought of Batman without Robin, the Lone Ranger without Tanto or Tarzan without Jane.
These examples also highlight another big point
A sidekick is not a pet!
The Lone Ranger's pet is a horse named silver, Tarzan's pet is a chimp named cheetah
And both pets and sidekicks are distinct from minions which is what masterminds really had no matter what the game called them.
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
And what, in terms of programming and/or balance, is the difference? IRL I'd say sapience, but we can't code that, yet. ^_^
(Although I might object to the characterization of Cheetah as a non-sapient.)
Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
[url=https://cityoftitans.com/forum/foradains-character-conclave]Foradain's Character Conclave[/url]
.
Avatar courtesy of [s]Satellite9[/s] [url=https://www.instagram.com/irezoomie/]Irezoomie[/url]
The main difference is usefulness and level of customization
Tanto is much more helpful than Silver, and you can justify giving him a wider variety of abilities, while silver is always going to be a horse, even if he's a really good horse he couldn't gain abilities a horse could never have.
A card playing horse that could win money and knew horse style kung fu would be a sidekick (or even a main character)
Likewise if Electra were Daredevil's sidekick (I'm not saying she was, so no need to correct me) we could do a lot more with her than with a bunch of regular ninjas.
Regular ninjas are minions not sidekicks or even pets so their abilities can't be customized at all But maybe their appearance can, you want ninjas dressed as baseball players using bats instead of swords? You want mime ninjas? or girl ninjas?
War-ee-ors Come out and Playyyay
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/browse/pub/3185/Crusader-Game-Books
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC48O9dPcNVdeyNM4efAvX6w/videos?view_as=subscriber
I can go with those distinctions, for purposes of this discussion. ^_^
Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
[url=https://cityoftitans.com/forum/foradains-character-conclave]Foradain's Character Conclave[/url]
.
Avatar courtesy of [s]Satellite9[/s] [url=https://www.instagram.com/irezoomie/]Irezoomie[/url]
Pages