Announcements
Join the ongoing conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/city-of-titans-official-633757967899951105
a new Q1 Developer update is live. Take a moment, and check it out.
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.
So you don't want teaming to be mandatory unless there is some kind of "Mechanic" that requires it? Other than just click on items at same time, or mass ball of HP. What kind of "Mechanic" are you talking about? I'd like to hear your ideas as to how you define a team oriented "Mechanic", other than the ones you don't like. If you are going to say that players will need people with X powers to perform a certain job, then that leads to people saying, "Oh, you aren't X Power Set!" (kick from team). I personally can't think of very many "Mechanics" that would require a team to perform other than having multiple objects that need to be taken care of within an X amount of time requiring more than one person to perform, or having some kind of end boss that is so strong that it will require multiple people to take down.
Perhaps Task Forces shouldn't be included as a major plot line for content if that is your issue. Perhaps they should just be a separate side story that doesn't involve any major characters throughout the majority of the game. Perhaps they shouldn't contain any badges in them so that people who don't do them don't have to worry about not receiving a badge if they are a badge hunter.
Problem with some of that though is the developers. They spent a lot of time and effort in designing these Task Forces and want the players to play them, otherwise that was just wasted time and money on their part. I understand the frustration of having a bad team, or waiting around for an eternity to get one together, or not having the right team make-up to complete the task. I've had those issues many times myself in CoH. I just don't think making a TF soloable is the proper answer for this. Again, when I think Task Force I think of something that needs a lot of people grouped together to overcome.
I'd rather see a better system for developing the teams needed to perform the Task Force. I'd rather see that, while being extremely difficult, it's not impossible for any team make-up to complete the Task Force. I'd rather see that the Task Force doesn't take 12 hours to complete once it's been started. I'd like to see that the Task Force doesn't have multiple kill X enemies spread out through multiple zones with spawns that take forever to respawn or are needed by other people to achieve a badge that leads to some kind of accolade. Solo to me just screams missions, not Task Forces.
I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!
I personally am willing to accept whatever gating the devs want to put on anything, assuming the content itself is not somehow mandatory for all players to do, or otherwise very important that they don't miss. If the only justification for making some content "team only" is the giant monster or tuff AV at t the end, fine by me. If there really is no hard and fast reason why you couldn't try to solo something, but they make it a TF requiring 8 players to start, I'm fine with that too. Even if the only reason for making something team only or giving it a certain minimum/maximum level, making it VIP only, etc is just to see how many people they manage to get through the gate, I'm ok with that.
FYI I'm going to post a new thread about the Warburg thing *(blatant advertizement for that thread)* because I find that interesting to hear from people about as well.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Well a couple have been offered as examples already..
As I said before I am all for improving that aspect of a TF but did not want to get into specifics in this thread because that's not what this thread is about, its about the reasons behind peoples desire to see a TF be team required content. I even said I would participate in a thread which discussed how to improve this aspect of team required mechanics.
But it seems you need to see examples of what I personally consider a more original and interesting mechanic than the 'click glowy at same time' or 'big bag of hp/damage output'. Keep in mind I fully expect people to nit pick specific examples because they don't see the bigger picture.
One way might be to include the division of resources concept as has been said. This can be done by purposefully requiring a split in the team. It can be accomplished by requiring two separate goals that need to be completed at the same time. This is not the only way it can be done but one way it COULD be done.. An example of a scenario COULD be The beard growing rocket is going to go off while "General Bad Guy" tries to escape, some have to go after the rocket and some the bad guy. This is a fantastic way as it give the choice of how to divide those resources in the hands of the player. Whats more it opens the task to be multi faceted in rewards. You catch the bad guy but the rocket goes off, less rewards....you stop the rocket but the bad guy escapes....less rewards....you do both...full rewards. As you can see this example includes nothing that requires a particular power/AT or specific tactic. One idea of an interesting mechanic that can be applied to many story scenerios.
Another more specific idea might be to use personal ties in a TF. There is a proposed if not promised concept of a personal nemesis. Make the TF slightly more generic (IE not tied to the main storyline) and have the main foes made up of each players personal nemesis. For example, my nemesis General Bad Guy and your nemesis Admiral Bad Guy team up to extort the city. The combining of those two foes would be very different than the teaming up of two different foes. Depending on how robust a nemesis system the game provides(if it does provide one) the locations might also be different (if say there was a flag for a nemesis to operate out of sewers/warehouse/volcano/candy store with a secret enterance leading to an alternate dimension populated by rabid penguins bent on learning how to play blackjack). This idea gives the illusion that Foes are as dynamic as the heroes they face. They can make teams just as we do. It also offers a large possibility for replay in terms of variety. This example may not offer the same level of player options in how to complete as the first example, but makes up for it by personally attaching the character to the task. What I mean is with your personal foe in the mission your are instantly tied to it. This helps immersion in both a character specific link (personal foe) and a reason for it to be repeatable (new foes who team with your foe).
Just two examples that not only stand on their own but if you mix elements together you now have even more variety.
Now before everyone screams 'How will the devs make it possible'. I have no answer for that....I am not a dev or programmer. Nor do I think these are the only two way to make a TF teams interesting....they are just examples.
And with that I sit back and watch how those specific examples and all the other examples posted after become the focus of this thread.
A lot of the Incarnate Trials in CoH had stuff like this.
The Lambda Sector had two different maps you had to SPRINT through at the same time in order to get enough grenades and molecular acids to defeat the AV at the end.
The BAF had the prisoners trying to escape in different places as well as having two AVs you had to defeat at very nearly the same time.
The Dilemma Diabolique Trial had towers you had to destroy simultaneously, it also had an AV you had to defeat while also destroying other distracting things that spawned behind you in the same room.
The Keyes had reactor computers that had to be accessed while also destroying the Goliaths and avoiding AntiMatter, who would one-shot people but you just had to taker your lumps and leave him alone.
The Magisterium had the boss fight at the end where you had to fight Tyrant, then back off and go get he light ray thingies when they respawned.
Outside that, the Abandoned Sewer Trial had the various special weapons you had to use on the Hydra head, and the shield generators, etc.
The movie thing had different "jobs" each team member had to accomplish.
Beyond stuff that's already been done, some ideas:
Team spawns with each team member in a separate cell, only certain people can get themselves out of their cell, have to free others. Or maybe one person can open another person's cell somehow but not their own.
Team fights badguys while one member has to stealth around and do other stuff, like one-shotting guards, clicking glowwies, leading hostage out, etc.
Some kind of capture the flag thing where your TF team has to defeat the badguy team while also protecting your own base.
Two (or more) separate AVs in different places or on different sub-maps that have to be defeated at the same time, or have to be defeated o quickly that you don't have time to solo one then solo the other.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
I think I finally get what you are trying to say. I'm not sure if I completely agree with it, but I understand it. In CoH the TF's in the beginning levels required a team simply because your character wasn't developed enough to be able to handle all the missions on it's own. As you leveled up and fleshed out your character they then began introducing ways for each AT to be needed for certain parts of the missions. You needed Defenders to debuff the AV, you needed Controllers to lock down extra mobs, you needed Tankers to keep the focus from squishies that were doing all the damage, etc. Then you had TF's that had lots of arrest Xs that were in separate zones making it much easier if you had multiple people to send out to arrest X enemies in each area. Also there were instances where you needed two or more groups of people to plug up pathways of escaping enemies or your mission would fail.
I can't really recall many TF's from CoH that didn't have it so that basically a character could solo the whole thing. I know people did do it, and if I recall right it literally took them days if not weeks sometimes to do it. On top of that they had to have a specific build with specific inspirations or temp powers in order to do it. Which to me says there was a reason to have a team in order to complete it. A Defender could debuff the AV, but didn't have enough damage to defeat it. A Blaster had enough damage to defeat the AV, but had no way to debuff the Regen to make it possible. That was the reasoning behind having a team requirement to perform the TF, each AT had an advantage they brought to the team to help overcome the obstacle.
I think some of the TF's are being a little over simplified in order to make this argument valid. Just because there were some people out there that knew how to properly build a specific AT to be able to solo a TF doesn't mean everybody knew how, or wanted to. I understand the desire to experience all the content. I understand the desire to achieve all the badges that are available in the game. I also can sympathize with those that hate to team because they've had the unfortunate experience of being on a bunch of lousy teams. I can also sympathize with the person whose time does not allow for them to be on during peak hours when teaming is easiest to achieve. I just don't think TF's should be scaled down to mission type difficulties. There is a reason why they were designed as a TF and it should remain that way.
I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!
Personally speaking, I have no problem with "raid/dungeon" content being optimised for groups of players in the slightest. This is one of the few times where I was actually *grateful* for WoW increasing the level cap. It meant that I was actually able to experience "raid content" for the *very* first time... and to take my sweet time doing so.
Sure, I cannot experience *all* of the lower end raid content (at least right now) because I am not good enough to really do the Lich King raid content solo.. I am fairly sure I can do the dungeons from there though.
However, even at *launch* you could still go into a raid/dungeon even if you were *solo* and try to do it (although it might not be recommended).
I would rather experience the content as the developers *want* it to be done, instead of a "watered down, catering for one" content.
Hell, Rift actually introduced 2 man content that actually PREVENTS larger groups of players from experiencing it (and WoW has the 3 man content as a comparison). The best thing with this, is that the content is *not* necessarily designed around "1 healer/1 Tank/1 DPS" setups... you can end up with 3 healers, or 3 DPS on it... and you can still complete it.
Side note: As CoT is planning to go for a megaserver setup, there shouldn't be as many "low points" in terms of player population, unlike what a normal multi shard setup can experience...
Wow, I honestly did not see that coming.
The incarnate trials were little more than long drawn out fights to me which gave rewards so that you would be prepared for the next long drawn out fight. They were a main reason I stopped doing TF's in general.
Unless they changed the trials in the last few months you are mistaken about a few things.
1-I remember the Lambda being one map with a lot of guys you had to beat in a certain order, you couldn't even choose the order.
2- Pretty much correct. The prisoners was a kind of division of resources. The defeat of the two foes at the same time is along the lines of team communication and how to apply force. There wasn't much variety in how to accomplish these tasks but it was a fantastic step forward in mission variety.
3-The towers did not have to be destroyed at the same time but if you did it gave you a badge for doing so. I did enjoy the survival stage though.
4- A lot of AV's could one shot foes ... the obliterating beam (I think that was what it was called... can't remember for sure) was a kind of two stage attack, a big damage hit (remember living on a character who got hit can't remember if it was a scrapper, tank or brute though) then a hold to everyone. If I remember right Anti-Matter didn't actually use a giant attack it was a kind of progressive DoT. First tick did so much, second more and third even more. It was possible to live through this attack too.
5-I never did the Magisterium so can only comment on your statement. It sounds to me like an already long fight was made long by needing to refill your light thingy or am I missing something. Its almost like the radiation shields in terra volta.
6-I cannot remember the sewer trial before the revamp at all. The revamp was just another fight which some temps to help you.
7-No idea what this is at all.
I'm not trying to be rude but I don't think you are getting what I am trying to say.
You bring up role specific needs (a blasters damage or a tanks aggro control). This is part of the 'holy trinity' concept. I explained this earlier in the thread so you can either scroll up and read it or send me a PM to explain it there. I think you are a type of player who wants the 'holy trinity' to be the core mechanic behind combat in CoT...I am not.
You further miss my point by focusing on the idea of specific build to defeat an AV level foe. A major point of contention for me is that an AV is by and large just a big bag of hp with high damage output. An AV with adds is just more hp's and damage. While I can enjoy encounters like this in the end its just another fight.
That's just it. the TF's were simple. The only real difference between a TF and regular content was it featured foes that were tougher and that to start the TF you needed a team. Aside from a couple of specific instances already mentioned they offered nothing new in gameplay you could not experience in regular content.
There just was no reason the TF could not offer a solo/small team options to go with the large team one from a purely mechanical standpoint. Especially when you factor in the final design of the mission slider.
That's fine, I can respect that's what you believe.
I think I know what you mean but want to ask just to make sure.
Are you are saying you worry that any option for lower difficulty in TF's will result in weaker TF design in general?
Or are you saying that your preference is for the 'intended' difficulty but do not care if someone else can do a less difficult version?
You misremember sort of: It was one map outside, and possibly technically inside too but in practice you sent one team to get the acids and one to get grenades unless doing a sLAM.
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team and Forum Moderator[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Had to go and look it up.
I remember this part now. I think the reason I forgot about this part was few teams I was on went for the acids, they went for the nades only. And even then they didn't worry about who got them. I guess this part of the trial was meant to be a division of resources it just didn't seem that way in practice (at least to me).
Maybe all I ever saw were sLAM's I dunno. As I said it was the HEAVY focus on long drawn out fights that made me stop doing the trials.
Radiac:
If a restriction (denied entry to content) on a player is justified, then I would agree it's not punishment. I was questioning what degree of gating is justified in the case of TFs, and stating my opinion that an unjustified restriction will feel like punishment to many people in an environment where fun is the key commodity that they have purchased. Being denied access without good reason may not feel punishing to you, and/or may not fit your definition of punishment. I can accept that.
"This TF requires 4 players to start and complete, because there are 4 computers to hack at once." - justified content gating to ensure players' fun.
"This TF requires 8 players to start, but can be completed by 4." - unjustified content gating that degrades potential for player enjoyment. Let's avoid this.
"This story arc is solo-only because too many people like to team." - poorly justified content gating. The game appeals to a wider audience without such restrictions.
****
islandtrevor:
Interesting. Coh was apparently more flexible than I remembered, the Final Boss -> Lt downgrade had slipped from my memory. I never saw it in action, but at least they'd made it work and felt comfortable with the results (in regular content).
****
Lambda trial:
Servers had different definitions and methods for sLAMs. On Virtue the typical Lambda was a PUG semi-sLAM where speed was the focus in every other way (turrets ignored, etc) but we'd split into two teams for acids/grenades to ensure victory and reduce deaths in the final phase in case we had newbies on the league. We also avoided any delay from Praetor White, since he appeared once all temp powers were collected.
I think a bit of clarification is needed here.
Lets take World of Warcraft as an example (because this actually provides a fairly robust raiding system when you get down to it).
There are different *versions* of the same raid for 10 man and 20/25 man groups. They also give different rewards for completing them. There are also different tactics and mechanics in play as well.
These do NOT scale down to 1 player... they still have to cope with the mechanics as they are intended for 10+ characters (especially now if you take into consideration the Flex raid setup that they have)
However, Blizzard do NOT stop players from trying to complete them solo. I believe that Blizzard take the point of view of "IF the player wants to do it, they can try to do it"... just so long as the player doesn't use exploits to complete it.
But it is also worth noting that Blizzard have tried to move as much "essential" content and lore to outside of the raids as possible. But it is worth noting that it is a different mindset.
For me, I would rather have the TF's and endgame content be designed around having "X players needed", although you can always try to complete them with fewer players, there would still be a base line version that no matter how "few" players are involved, it cannot get any easier than that.
If it scaled all the way down so that it was of a suitable difficulty for a single person to complete, then that (in my mind at least) is not a Task Force... it is just a mission.
hm, I would personally reserve 'holy trinity' to cases where people are clearly talking about rigid AT roles, and not roles in a general sense. I think it is perfectly reasonable to design group battles so that certain broad tasks (like aggro management, or damage, or crowd control) need to be managed. One thing many loved about CoH was that we had a wide range of ways to manage those tasks without having to stick to AT-specific solutions.
I don't think that describes the TFs that were added later in the game's life. One thing that bugged me about the old TFs was that AV battles were basically variations of 'bag-o-hp' battles. For later TFs they attempted to make the battles more dynamic, by adding ambush waves and giving the AVs more abilities that could change the nature of the fight in some way. You dismiss adds as just contributing more hp into the mixing bowl, but the fact is it added a lot of options for the kind of dynamics that made teaming interesting (for me, at least), since it allowed a wider range of strategies an opportunity to shine.
Even some of the middle-aged TFs, like the STF, had mechanics that were designed to challenge multiple players in a way that would not be permitted in a normal mission (because of the requirement that those scale down properly to one). Being able to provide designers that kind of latitude for an extremely limited portion of the content (like TFs/Trials) gives them options for exploring approaches they couldn't otherwise consider. I haven't seen a compelling reason for taking that kind of content design off the table. I don't think team size should prevent you from starting a TF (if you are willing to ignore the warnings), but it should be with the clear understanding that you are doing something which is not explicitly supported by the design (aside from allowing you to try).
If you feel there are things you aren't seeing or reading that are in a TF, I am all for having them figure out ways to mitigate some of that (especially when the solution could also be benefit folks doing for regular missions, such as journalling dialog and cutscenes), but I am not in favor of them doing it by making it more difficult to design interesting task force scenarios.
Global: @Second Chances
SG: Fusion Force
"And it's not what I wanted
Oh no, it's not what I planned
See it's not where I thought I'd be
It's just where I am"
I think it's entirely appropriate to gate [u]rewards[/u] behind game mechanics. But I think it's disappointing to gate [u]content[/u] behind game mechanics.
By rewards, I means things like experience, influence, inspirations, badges, gear, reputation, titles, costumes, etc. By content, I mean things like story text, plaque text, enemy NPCs, zones, etc. I think players should be able to go everywhere and see everything, with no risk and no reward.
For example, a solo player should be able to start a Task Force in "story mode". The badguys should be nerfed to damp paper bags wielding wet noodles, so it can be solo'd. The player should be able to see all the dialog and whatnot, but receive absolutely no rewards (see above list).
Why do this? From the creator's perspective: because a lot of people put a lot of effort into that content. Artists, writers, etc generally want the widest audience possible. Exposing players to that content often hypes them up to want more. Which means greater player involvement, more playing, more money spent supporting the game.
From the developer's perspective: content that's been created but is utilized at less than 100% gives the development team a lower return on investment than content that is utilized more. Opening up content, but without breaking game play by giving rewards, means the time/effort is better worth for development. The developers generally want to add to the game in ways that more players can use. If we add "story mode" players to the voices of traditional players asking for more task forces, we'll get more task forces faster.
And from a game perspective, letting a player see the content may be exactly the sort of encouragement they need to play the content.
[size=1]Kickstart Backer # 771[/size]
The Holy Trinity is how I described it, tanking (or foe management which includes aggro control or crowd control), Healing and Dps. The fact that CoX gave you more options to fill those rolls does not change the fact that any goal was based around them. Just because you could improve healing or dps with buffs and foe management with holds and debuffs does not change the core of the encounter. I stand by my assertion that that I do not want the Holy trinity to be the major factor in every encounter.
I agree some efforts were made in providing a challenging encounter. I just don't think they ways they were done were very interesting. If you look honestly at almost every TF, up to (and mostly including) the incarnate trials you can see that the level of challenge came by increasing the amount of foes you had to fight and increasing how much damage those foes could take and dish out. If you really look at it the only difference between most TF's was the fact they upped the same mechanics that were in the regular game. There is nothing wrong with doing this at all. My contention is not that it was done, its that the reverse can also be done without hindering those who want the challenge. Let me say that a different way. If all that is different between a TF and regular missions is the TF has tougher foes then the OPTION to lower the difficulty does not hinder that TF or anyone who wants to do it. [/quote]
You are right I did just dismiss adds as nothing more than contributing to the mixing bowl. I probably should have explained my reason but I thought it was implied.
Adds are the additional foes who hinder your progress to the defeat of a single or small group of targets. They are mostly used as way to distract you from the main target or to bolster the strength of the main target. An example of a distraction is an ambush...an example of a bolster is the healer Add. They do bring a level of change to the battle dynamic in the sense of you can choose to react to them or not. One makes the fight easier the other doesn't. By their very nature they are tied to the main foes. This is why I say they are more hp/damage.
The thread has gotten long so you may have missed it. No one is actually saying to limit the devs creativity in creating challenges. Its actually been said by myself that I can understand and agree that a TF could be limited to a min team size for this very reason. But if said creativity is limited to just more hp and more damage I will be disappointed and would prefer them instead design inclusive content. Let me say that another way. If the only way the devs can come up with for creating team content is upping the foes strength then I find that limited.
Well... again not suggesting they stop being creative.
But lets just stop a second and look at the idea behind the first part of this quote. You say make it easier to see the content in a TF and offer a few suggestions. While I will agree that these and the other suggestions could 'mitigate' the missing of content why does anyone (note the use of anyone and not everyone) simply refuse to even acknowledge that my suggestion could also.
I am advocating choice and trying to understand the reason why people think it should be limited in this particular case. The arguments against I have seen in the thread seem (please again note the use of 'seem' and the fact I did not say 'are') to be very narrow in view.
Maybe its just me but I place a high value on choice and do not think the TF's that CoX had to offer were worth giving up choice. If CoT is different then yay, if its not then I will be disappointed, neither will change my desire to play the game in its entirety.
One of the better suggestions for giving access to all content I have seen. Throw it in the mission architect system as an exploration or dev commentary mission. Give it a 'I win' button for those times when a solo can't actually proceed (the click at same time situation). This way the TF can be as complex/challenging/hard/new mechanic rich as it wants yet someone can still see it if they want.
Can this happen with the normal content as well please.... ;)
That is quite a spoiler system.
Instead of trying to tone-down missions to fit solo-gameplay more, why not improve upon the LFG and Grouping systems?
That is a very good point. There'd need to be a delayed release of the "story mode" version. Something like three months so that the task force would have to be solved the intended way before opening up the content to everyone.
Improving the LFG system doesn't address the problem of gating content. No matter how easy and convenient it is to find a group, some players will have difficulty finding others want to do a specific task force on a specific schedule. And while we should gate the rewards behind the game mechanics, there's really no reason to gate the content. It's already there; let everyone see it (after a suitable interval) without giving them any of the rewards for it.
[size=1]Kickstart Backer # 771[/size]
I give up.
And please do this for *normal* content as well please. Sometimes I just cannot find people for a mission I need help on, but I still want to be able to see what happens in the quest that I cannot complete...
It's an MMO, you want to encourage team-work as much as possible. Not necessarily saying you should discourage soloing, but you certainly shouldn't encourage it too much.
I have yet to see a good argument as to why soloing should be possible other than "Because finding other players interested is too hard." or "So I can read and do the content at my own pace." although players have presented good counter arguments to address these issues without necessarily making the task-force solo-able.
I stand by my earlier statement that you should be able to [i]attempt[/i] the content, but to adjust content so you can succeed alone? - - I disagree.
Well, the good news is that we will not have 'low population servers' in CoT, so you ought to have an easier time finding a team-up.
If you still need help, perhaps there's an App for that? http://www.theherobiz.com/2014/03/21/comic/episode-5-simon-sayeth/simonsayeth16/
Be Well!
Fireheart
Either one of those reasons alone is sufficient to support solo play.
We all want people to play the game; players are what make it possible for the game to continue. Once the content has been created, making it difficult for some players to see it is counterproductive.
Gating the rewards (experience, badges, titles, gear, influence, costumes, etc) of a task force behind team play is more than sufficient to encourage team play. Gating the content (reading the lore, seeing the zone, fighting the nerfed boss) of a task force behind team play simply prevents more players from seeing it. It certainly doesn't discourage team play or encourage solo play.
[size=1]Kickstart Backer # 771[/size]
Gates are going to occur, it happens in all MMO's since it's not possible to appeal to all crowds while simultaneously maintaining complexity. The moment such content is allowed for solo play, it defeats the purpose of grouping.
What do MMOs do to compensate for the crowds that can't view content that has a specific target? They make more content that targets those left out or allows everyone. The target ranging from anything: A level, an origin, a power, a group, a solo etc.
Not to mention, some content just wouldn't make sense to be solo-able, as some have described a step that requires simultaneous actions that one player just cannot fulfill alone. When it comes to an Origin-specific mission, it wouldn't make sense (in the story) to give players of Technology descent trials that require the use of Magic.
Some content was meant to be both rare and difficult to preserve it's uniqueness. Making such content easier to access burns players out of the game faster.
The badge that rested on top of the globe in Atlas Park required you to have a certain Travel-Power or the assistance of another player to acquire it. According to this discussion, we should build an elevator so everyone could obtain this badge alone with no gates in the way.
Although that is the most well known badge, there were others that were just as hard to get solo ie heart of the hamidon badge was a real sod to get solo unless you had superspeed or a friend to TP friend you (or your corpse) onto it.... or you had to wait for a successful hami raid and then dive in after that to get it.
Actually, that brings up another situation... Hamidon is a good example of "content" that a single player couldn't complete solo....
Sure, it was *one* mob, but one mob that was (for a period of time that is) "End game content" or a *goal* for players to achieve.
But it was also definitely something that *couldn't* be attempted solo, and I am certain that most players *expected* something like that to *not* be done solo (bar the glitch that happened *once* where he was defeated with a single punch IIRC).
Hell, even if they made a *version* of Hamidon for a taskforce (ooh look, they did!), do you think that it should be doable "solo"?, even if it was *already* a "weakened" version of it?
*edit* I would like to say, that mechanics that could be limiting could involve flying targets/mobs off the floor, so if it was an all melee setup, where *none* of the players had any form of range/vertical movement powers, I could see some things being VERY hard/slow to complete.
But that is why teaming is useful. Sure, it SUCKS for something like that to happen, but it *CAN* happen. And if the only solution is to plan the *weakest* possible combination as "base difficulty", just to satisfy the players who want to "experience the story"... then I have a feeling that they might well be *ruining* potential good content, just to satisfy those few players.
Edited to include Dark Astoria
I agree all MMO's have gates to content. You need to finish this to do this or by level to be eligible. As for solo play negating the purpose of grouping. You need to give a reason. I thought grouping was to have fun, enjoy the team dynamic ect. How does a solo player defeating Frostfire impact a Team defeating Frostfire?
Explain the lack of endgame content that was made for the solo player. Aside from the flashback system which largely just let you revisit content there was not much new for the solo or small team player to experience. So no, CoX did not compensate. Dark Astoria and night ward were a great steps toward granting post 50 content for solo/small teams. It came so close to the end I cannot speak to if it was a direction the devs were taking or not.
There were VERY few instances of any mechanic that REQUIRED a team. The clicking glowey being the easiest to use as an example but one example does not make it a reason to require teams for all the rest of the TF's that did not include this feature.. As for story, I thought we were all writing our own characters story? Just because your robot doesn't use magic mine can't?
Its this kind of thinking that produces the artificial inflation of gameplay. Remember Ghouls and Ghosts? Remember the 'go play again to get the better ending'. If you want to make something unique fine. Don't make the way I see it revolve around repeat plays. If you want me to play content more than once (which by itself destroys its uniqueness) then make the actual play interesting, not so I can get a bit of the story each time.
A badge is a reward not content. In your example the content is the globe. So according to this discussion what you are saying is to even see the globe at all I need to be on a team. I'm suprised that you would use this as an example when you actually quote this very thing in your post.
Why can no one understand and keep using this as an argument. We are not asking the devs to plan for the 'weakest' or for them not to create 'potential good content' We are saying that based on what CoX gave us there was no reason to limit that content. Pretty much all TFs COULD have been made solo or small team options by just applying the mission slider (notoriety). I posted a video earlier in the thread showing how the first three missions of the ITF would look at minimum difficulty and aside for the fact the player in the video was woefully overpowered such a TF was scaled to be more challenging than regular content but not 'impossible' to do solo.
No one seems to be able to see that with the mission slider the mechanic was already there to give us what we desired. It did not change how the TF was designed, it did not stop people from teaming and it most certainly did not limit the devs in thinking of ways to make the next TF. Its just a shame that the route they took was more enemies and tougher foes instead of actually trying to create something we had not seen before. If they had then maybe I could see arguments like this having more validity.
At this point I believe all we are doing is kicking a dead horse. You see it your way, others see it their way. Neither side can seem to come to an agreement on this. I think it's time to agree to disagree and just leave it at that. Perhaps with all the discussion that has gone on there is something in there that the Devs can glean out of it to possibly use in regards to TF's, or whatever they will be called, when they put them in the game. I'm really not sure you'll get the answers you are looking for, or will be satisfied with any answers that you are given.
I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!
How on gods green earth did I miss this...
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/missingworldsmedia/the-phoenix-project-city-of-titans/posts/630570
It in no way answers my question but still renders my concerns moot. It seems that the game will give us a (however implemented) personal arc that carries up through the game and it not be tied to the TF's unless I want it to. The fact I also get to choose branching decisions is beautiful.
I hate you all for not pointing this out to me (meaning I hate myself for somehow skipping this kickstarter update)
That was the single KS update that got me the most excited about CoT. However, I'm not sure that makes this thread moot. Just like we could get from 1-50 in CoX without ever running a TF, I expect there will still be team-only content in CoT, and I wouldn't be surprised if it held important meta-story.
I think both sides have argued well here. Every time I think I'm persuaded one way, someone brings up an excellent counterpoint. One request I'd make to the devs with a lot of "please"s attached: if there is gonna be team-oriented content, I beseech you to make it clear from the very start of the mish/arc. They got to be pretty good at this in CoX over time, but in the early and middle days it was frustrating to find an AV or EB in an arc without any warning of such at the beginning, requiring me to halt progress till I could find someone to help me (not always easy at the typical hours when I played). Also annoying in SWTOR was going through a long conversation with a contact, including making my own dialogue choices, only to find at the end that the mission they were giving me was designed for teams. If the floaty symbol above team-mission contacts had just been a different colour...
[tangent] Oh, btw, if you're gonna add giant floaty coins above NPCs heads, please give us an option to turn them off. I really disliked when CoX did a "me too!" with that. [/tangent]
Spurn all ye kindle.
Did you forget about the Atlas Medallion accolade? I consider rewards as a part of content – they contain history of your character as well as events in the game. The fact that you needed to have a specific Travel-Power or in a team with someone that had a Travel-Power to drop you up there created a gate to complete that content.
You did not have to obtain that badge, nor did you have to endure a Task Force.
As for all other arguments, I agree with the oOStaticOo, we clearly have different views on the matter.
As for the Kickstarter Update – walk your own path and create your own destiny.
And there we have it – You don’t have to attend group-oriented content.
Your right, it does not answer my question of why require a team in CoX's (as I said).
It does render many of my concerns about a team required mission that provides important meta-story moot though (as I said). The biggest concern I had was that in CoX the TF's were no different than in regular content. There wasn't a reason to set them apart other than they had more and tougher foes which I found a boring concept.
With the branching storylines and alignment system both having an impact on how the npcs react to us (combat and non-combat) the team dynamic takes on an entire new level. What happens if player A, who has made friends with the hellions, and player B, who has murdered every hellion he has ever seen, team up to do a mission against or for the Hellions? Even if this system is completely shelved because it cannot be done it shows that CoT is trying to include interesting new ways to interact with the game and each other.
In essence it renders my personal concerns moot. If it does not yours or someone else then by all means feel free to discuss it. (Not that you need confirmation or permission to do so)
I loved that about city of heroes as well. Very rarely i'd see the "we need a healer so we are asking you" though I often warned people not to do that with me. But I found myself joining because I was looking for a fun time, rather than because I had to. I thought the game forced teaming at one time until I realized we all teamed cause it was fun, rather than forced. that was realized when I played CO, quit that game and moved back to CoX, I'd realized how much I'd taken for granted in city of heroes.
Indeed i'd ended up noticing that most of us today were different then many mmorpg players in that, we played much more for fun and we were much more like non mmorpg players. Most "normal"(should I even say that?) mmorpg playes teamed cause they had to and wanted the reward, I imagine some even didn't care about the fun, they are just going through routine while people playing city of heroes did things more cause they wanted to do that content. It wasn't really grindy and the fact that we had the variety of buffs debuffs, crowd control and the many different powersets yet nothing was absolutely required. Healing wasn't required either nore were tanks, because of the alternatives and the fact that it was just fun messing with everything.
I realized something today(5/8/2014) that many MMORPG players, are not like us who enjoyed CoX. They enjoy repetitiveness and predictability, rather then unpredictability. We on the other hand enjoy unpredictability and variety.
Oops, sorry: didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I was just thinking that -- aside from all the really cool planned stuff regarding our personal stories -- there will probably still be world-affecting story (like the Praetorian arc) gated behind team-only content. I thought that was one of your concerns, but apologise if I misunderstood. Maybe it was someone else who said that. Heck, maybe it was I who said it! I'm getting old -- this morning I was looking for my badge for work and my gf had to point out that I was wearing it.
Spurn all ye kindle.
To be entirely accurate, TF were 'supposed to be' events you could start with your teammates one night and finish on another. Most players decided they didn't want to play them that way. What was intended has taken a back seat to what the players want and how they use what they're given.
And THIS is exactly what I'm asking for. Your buddy that soloed the ITF? He had to ask others to start with him and the leave right? Or not quit and log off? Same thing...it's a hack...a cheap workaround. Why put the players through all that? Why not just allow them to start and finish it solo?
Again, there's a hack. Why force players to do this? Yes, it's a multiplayer game. I plan on teaming . I LIKE teaming. As another poster said up-thread you're treating the whole solo versus team thing like it's an absolute. I'm not saying that I don't want to team. I'm not saying that I don't want to team of TFs. What I'm saying is that if I ever get a toon that's powerful enough to run a TF solo I'd like to try to do so without jumping through a bunch of hoops to do it. The Zone Chat was a LOT easier to deal with once the folks screaming for bridges and fillers stopped. I don't want to see that sort of thing return.
As I said before, you sound like I'm never going to team EVER and that's not true. Maybe I have insomnia and want to run solo. Maybe I'm sick, drinking broth and don't want to be a burden to my team. Maybe I want to take my time and read ALL of the content that the writers will be working so hard on. Maybe I just had a bad teaming experience and I'm pissed and want to sulk around solo for a while. Is that ok? Is it socially acceptable for me to NOT cling to other players every minute of the time I'm logged in?
As for your superhero analogy earlier: Take Cap, Daredevil, Spidey and Ghost Rider and put them on a team fighting through ten buildings of their strongest foes. Sounds like fun...a real challenge. Now let Thor take on the exact same crowd. Pretty pathetic I'd say. The bad guys wouldn't stand a chance. So...again...IF I ever get a toon that I even THINK might be able to solo a TF, even if it means dozens of deaths, mountains of debt and hours of my time...WHO CARES? It's how I chose to spend those hours on that specific day. The next time I log in I might be forming a team to traipse through all the Dr Megaevil story arcs.
I remember when Star Wars was cool...a long, long time ago...
Pages