Announcements

Read our most recent update here: New Year's Message from Dr. Tyche!

Get the latest Patch now! The MacOS Client Launcher is Now available in the store! If you've already donated $50 or more, you'll find the Mac Launcher on your rewards page. https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/

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

Epic Archetypes for players with chatacters at 50

60 posts / 0 new
Last post
Grognard_87
Grognard_87's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: 01/27/2016 - 08:25
Epic Archetypes for players with chatacters at 50

One thing I loved with CoH was getting the epic architypes and when I got my first hero to 50 (got CoV first so my first 50 was a villain, even when waiting for Issue 7 for so long.) I had access to the Kheldians being Peace Bringers and Warshades.

What I loved about these guys was not only were they pretty powerful with being able to swap forms, but they were totally unique compared to other ATs! I know this is probably way, WAY ahead of anything planned at the moment, but I would love to see something like this planned for the future. Certainly not the same as Kheldians, but ATs that are unique and different, compared to the others and it felt like a real reward when you finally unlocked them.

I also hope the team doesn't do City of Villains epic ATs with the widow and the spiders because, for me personally, it was really annoying to mess up the Lore of the game with them, though their powers were quite cool, I was hoping to play a Nictus or a shape-shifter. Maybe even one of the Coralax that lived under Sharkhead Island.

To avoid going into a rant I'll just state I'd love to see something really awesome that makes getting to 50 feel like such an achievement, but at the same time be somewhat balanced in the game too.

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 day ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
If MWM implements something

If MWM implements something equal to epic AT's then I think you should have to do more than just getting to level 50, I think one or two specific achievements (per EAT) would be appropriate.

Minotaur
Minotaur's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/05/2012 - 12:49
The issue CoH had was the "PL

The issue CoH had was the "PL meh I want a kheldian" crowd. The problem is getting an achievement that is a real measure of progress rather than something you just farm to unlock the epic.

Tech Team and Forum Moderator

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
You could make a crafted item

You could make it a crafted item that's really rare and make people have to get it to drop or buy it off the market for a lot of IGC then make it available for Stars in the Starmart.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Grognard_87
Grognard_87's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: 01/27/2016 - 08:25
Radiac wrote: You could make
Radiac wrote:

You could make it a crafted item that's really rare and make people have to get it to drop or buy it off the market for a lot of IGC then make it available for Stars in the Starmart.

That's a interesting thought, but I can see a lot of people who have the time doing the grinding and ect.

I think no matter what you do, someone will be attempting to fire off as fast as they can to complete and get what they want for the class.

Hm...this is a interesting idea. Let's say Titans were to implement something like Swtor's Legacy system where they work like achievements and are global on your characters, maybe you have to complete the equivalent to four or five separate Ops to gain access or, let's say high-level TFs each give an automatic reward at the end along with the normal ones like say a piece of an ancient artifact if the unlock is somekind of being of magic or part of a unknown alien device if the epic AT is an alien. Parts that by themselves do nothing, but when you put them together you gain access to either a mini-mission like Tweek's intoduction in swtor or it'll be a instant unlock. Maybe even the ability to attempt a mission that you need a team with to do it.

The backlash of the latter is that I often like playing by myself (as I live at home, I often get bothered by my parents so teaming is a pain, unless I'm up late) not to mention I've been burned by SOOO many players "Needing" items they don't need both in WoW and others.

Eitherway, I think no matter WHAT you do, you'll get people complaining about it. I don't believe there is any perfect way to do it, however there is always a chance to be surprised.

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: The issue CoH had was

((EDIT TO FIX TYPOS))

Quote:

The issue CoH had was the "PL meh I want a kheldian" crowd. The problem is getting an achievement that is a real measure of progress rather than something you just farm to unlock the epic..

This type of player will be around regardless of unlockable classes or not.

For me, I think the biggest mistake the game could make in regards to unlockable content is to try and force a 'sense of accomplishment' from the players.

What I am saying is that the devs may have a different idea of what constitutes a 'sense of accomplishment' than players have. I never really felt a sense of accomplishment upon completing a TF in CoH, but I sure did when I figured out how to build a character who could solo the TV respec trial.

Its probably best if the devs don't worry about forcing feelings on us through the use of unlockables and instead just make sure there isn't an exploit that hurts the game in regards to them.

As for unlocking a special class .... I personally think it should be tied to an account achievement and not a character one. This way hyper focus is not required if this is a personal goal.

cybermitheral
cybermitheral's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/21/2013 - 20:54
Unlock Class via Drops is a

Unlock Class via Drops is a bad idea in my opinion as you are slave to the RNGods.
Must do certain Trials/TF/Raids/etc? But I prefer to solo...

However what about:
- Get 3 different Classes to Max Level
- ## Hrs Played. This stops being PL'd even being PL'd to 3 different classes.

Just some ideas.

The Phoenix Rising Initiative Rules Lawyer

Kiyori Anoyui
Kiyori Anoyui's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/10/2013 - 11:03
All I know if they are going

All I know if they are going to call them something it should be"Titans". That's just my opinion though. # of hours played is an interesting concept. Makes more sense than get to this specific level. Can't speed those up. The argument to that is that not everyone has the hours to put in. I think the 3 different classes to max level is the same issue just extended as the farmers gonna farm

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

Avatar by lilshironeko

Nyxz
Nyxz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/09/2015 - 03:37
What about tying them to

What about tying them to Veteran rewards. (with or without achievements required, depending on how difficult you want it to be)

+1 to calling them Titans; just makes absolute sense.

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
If it's a randomized "very

If it's a randomized "very rare" drop that can happen to anyone, at any time, you could theoretically have a total newbie get one in like Outbreak (or the equivalent thereof). That's the main drawback I see with the randomized drop system. I guess they could do it like CoX and make some drops only happen once you reach a certain level, and then make it a drop that you can only get when you're level 50+, like purples in CoX.

As for players with available time verus those without, the game devs have mentioned here and there that the old adage "time is money" will be somewhat in effect, in the sense that you'll be able to spend time and grind for stuff (or more accurately for the IGC necessary to buy stuff off the auction house) OR you can spend money to get Stars to then buy the thing you want without all the hassle of grinding for it. I think this is a prime example of a thing people would pay or grind for, and as such I would implement it that way.

In fact, I wouldn't even make it a global or local unlock. If it were my call, there would be some kind of recipe or salvage or item that drops that you can craft up and when you get it done, you can then expend it in order to pay for the right to create an Epic AT. One epic toon per item acquired. you make the Epic Key with a toon, email it to your global account, then when you go to make a new toon, you can cash it in and make that new toon an Epic class. It asks you "Are you sure?" you click "Yes!" and it destroys your Epic Key and gives you menu of Epic classes to choose from, you pick one, then you're off and running. Once that class is chosen, no respeccing into a different Epic class.

If there were several different types of Epic ATs, and if they were somewhat better in terms of how fast they can carve their way through a map, like Masterminds in CoX, I could see that being a very "in demand" item, thus possibly sinking IGC and Stars and thus keeping the overall total amount of IGC in circulation fairly under control while keeping the demand for IGC and Stars fairly constant. Of course the street prices of the epic item that unlocks it would probably be astronomical. I don't consider that a bad thing, as it would probably eventually calm down after the initial first wave rush is over.

When I played CoX in 2011-2012 I used to play my Mastermind solo by day to grind for purples and INF and then play my other toons at night doing Incarnate Trials. I probably averaged like 5 million INF per day plus about one purple per month doing that on the Mastermind. And that doesn't even count the Hero Merits I got, which I got like clockwork, because my routine was every day I'd do the 5 or 6 alignment tip missions to max out my Hero Merit potential for the day on that toon. I got tons of specific level rares I wanted that way for all of my toons, and the INF and purples were just gravy. If the Mastermind has that kind of value-added in terms of reward potential per day, then I could see making it an Epic AT that you have to unlock via a drop or items as I described and it would still be worth it, because you'd get more IGC with the Mastermind which would then fund your next Epic toon, and so on.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: In fact, I wouldn't
Quote:

In fact, I wouldn't even make it a global or local unlock. If it were my call, there would be some kind of recipe or salvage or item that drops that you can craft up and when you get it done, you can then expend it in order to pay for the right to create an Epic AT..

I absolutely hate this idea...sorry man. Making an epic AT purchasable or unlockable is fine but limiting it to one per unlock (no matter how it is unlocked) goes against the idea of alts IMO. That is unless it was unlock one type of Epic you can create as many times as desired out of multiple choices.

Quote:

If there were several different types of Epic ATs, and if they were somewhat better in terms of how fast they can carve their way through a map, like Masterminds in CoX, I could see that being a very "in demand" item, thus possibly sinking IGC and Stars and thus keeping the overall total amount of IGC in circulation fairly under control while keeping the demand for IGC and Stars fairly constant..

If the Epics were better than other ATs then all that would happen is the other ATs would become less desirable than the Epics. Couple this with your idea of making them real money purchasable and you have the very definition of pay to win.
Again....do not like this... at all.
I would prefer that the Epics not be better but instead be different. Perhaps they have access to power sets that no other AT has... but the Epics should still be balanced by the same metrics as all other ATs.

Truth be told...I am not a huge fan of craftable Epic ATs either. I personally think the unlock should be done one of two ways.
First, account wide achievement. A combination of defeat, location and mission achievements that unlock the Epic....akin to the way Accolades were unlocked in CoH .... but instead use account wide achievements so progress towards unlocking the Epic can be done with any alt you have.
Second, a series of missions and TF's. Treat the unlocking of an Epic as a reward for completing the story of their arrival. Some mission would be found in the regular missions of the game, throw in a TF or two that further the story and then some hidden missions players need to go out and find.

I also would love it if the 'Titans' Epic AT were based off the AT's in CoH. Unlock the AT and you now can create a classic Scrapper or Blaster. These could be slowly released one a month for a very long time. The only difference these 'Titans' would have than home grown AT's is a new power set that follows a similar style as the ones from CoH so they would not be unbalanced in CoT and possibly starting at a higher level to simulate the 'Return of the Titans'. The nice thing is this unlock could require a separate unlock per 'Titan' type....with a corresponding change in how they are unlocked as well. It would be ALOT of bang for a relatively small investment by the devs.
This is of course a pipe dream as its unlikely it could be done without some legalities involved. Still...would be nice to see a legacy acknowledgement in the Epics.

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
We can agree that we like

We can agree that we like different things. I think the randomized, Very Rare, one-at-a-time, consumable Epic Key drop would be fun. But, as I've said in the past, I am identifiably the single biggest source of monumentally unpopular ideas on this forum, especially in terms of monetization (and by that I mean I'm generally PRO monetization). I don't take that to mean that I'm wrong (or that anyone else is wrong, for that matter). Popularity is not necessarily correctness, and people basically want everything for free that they can talk someone else into handing over.

In any event, IF there were a craftable Epic AT unlock, and further IF that "Epic Key" were available in the auction house for IGC and in the Starmart for Stars, I bet that single item would be the bridge that defines the Star value of IGC. If they sell Stars for 1 cent each, and they sell the Epic Key for 500 Stars in the Starmart, then you go online and see the average going rate for Epic Keys at auction is like 500 million IGC, then ipso facto the IGC is worth one millionth of a Star and as such one millionth of a cent.

If this happens, then any tweaking of the Epic Key price in Stars or any tweaking of the rate at which they drop would affect IGC and Star values across the board. If they make Epic Keys drop more, then they'll sell for less IGC and as such one Star will be worth less IGC suddenly. If Epic Keys somehow become more scarce, the IGC cost will increase, the Star cost will remain fixed, and thus the IGC cost of a Star will increase.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: We can agree that we
Quote:

We can agree that we like different things.

Yup, which is why I made sure to make all my statements reflect it was opinion and not fact. If I made you think I was saying you were wrong I apologize. And I have no issue with monetization....I have issue with exploitive monetization. Single use character unlocks would be exploitive IMO....especially for a game that has decided its end game is alting.

Quote:

In any event, IF there were a craftable Epic AT unlock, and further IF that "Epic Key" were available in the auction house for IGC and in the Starmart for Stars, I bet that single item would be the bridge that defines the Star value of IGC. If they sell Stars for 1 cent each, and they sell the Epic Key for 500 Stars in the Starmart, then you go online and see the average going rate for Epic Keys at auction is like 500 million IGC, then ipso facto the IGC is worth one millionth of a Star and as such one millionth of a cent.

Any highly desirable item could fill the same role in the marketplace...I don't see this as a beneficial enough reason to make Epic ATs a one time use craftable item.
I have no problem with Epic ATs being sold for real money as well as a way to unlock them in game....I do have a problem if those Epics were 'better' than other AT's or if they were single use. One is pay2win the other is exploitive.
If you want to monetize something about Epic AT's then I would suggest monetizing the way they get unlocked in the game. Sell a tradable mission pack that rewards the activating player with the chance to create as many Epic ATs desired upon completion of the arc or arcs. This would appeal to both the players who want to do all content and those who want the Epic At. The Devs could make as many or as few Epics as they want for increased revenue. These mission packs could be a required purchase for both F2P players and subscription ones or could just be for the F2P players depending on how the devs decide to monetize them.

I am just too lazy to go searching now but I remember reading that almost all unlockables in the game will be for sale and everything that is for sale will be unlockable in the game. Arguing about monetization seems like a wasted effort when the decisions have already been made.

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
As far as pay to win and the

As far as pay to win and the relative power level of different ATs, I personally expect there to be a gamut of different ATs, some of which will be considered "below average power level overall" and some of which will be considered "above average". If Epics get rolled out after the game has gotten rgoing for like a year or two, then I expect the Epics that we do get will likely be more above average than below. Power creep being a thing, this is the most likely scenario, plus they aren't promising Pets-based "Mastermind" type classes at launch, so Pets ATs could be what we're ultimately talking about, in reality. MY MM in CoX could cfrank up the difficulty and trudge through a mission map way more efficiently (in terms of swag per minute spent playing him) than any of my other ATs (granted most of them were Defenders).

Even if this is the case, I don't expect that allowing people to either buy the new AT with real-money-backed Stars or grind for it by purchasing it on the auction house with IGC will be a problem. Pay to Win is mostly only a real problem for competitive, PVP-based games. I expect CoT to be more of a cooperative, PVE based game (like CoX was) and I expect everybody will be able to set their own difficulty to whatever they need it to be to get through their missions solo. This being the case, I don't see where someone else buying an Epic hurts me. If anything, that Epic might be able to help me get a "Master of ____" badge on a TF or help me do the really hard "Abandoned Sewer Trial" without having to cheat and sneak a level 50 in there, etc. Will there be PVP, yes, but it won't be the kind of "go to the PVP zone and hope you don't get ganked by Epics" type of PVP, it will be more the Arena-style "join a PVP group and do team vs. team fights or 1 on 1" which are the type of PVP events where they have rules. Like "bring your best Scrapper, its scrappers only" or "everyone is level 5, just for fun" or, maybe "Epics only" or"No Epics". These sorts of PVP contests tend to have some form or rules to attempt to make it somewhat fair.

So the only thing having a "better Epic" would do is allow those people to crank up their difficulty settings and thus maybe get better swag as a result, and even that swag part is based on the expectation that getting swag will be dependent on being able to blow through missions quickly to get IGC and item drops. For all we know getting stuff in COT might be a totally different, mechanically.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Riptide
Riptide's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 weeks 5 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/09/2013 - 07:01
islandtrevor72 wrote: I also
islandtrevor72 wrote:

I also would love it if the 'Titans' Epic AT were based off the AT's in CoH.

If we have Epic AT's I would suggest finding a better name. Children googling how to get their TEAT could be led to some unexpected places on the web :P

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

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: As far as pay to win
Quote:

As far as pay to win and the relative power level of different ATs, I personally expect there to be a gamut of different ATs, some of which will be considered "below average power level overall" and some of which will be considered "above average". .

While this is likely to occur I do not want to see the Devs specifically design any AT including the Epics to 'above average' I especially do not want them to design Epics to be better in order to make them a more attractive item to be purchased.

Quote:

If Epics get rolled out after the game has gotten rgoing for like a year or two, then I expect the Epics that we do get will likely be more above average than below. Power creep being a thing, this is the most likely scenario

Yes power creep can occur in a game...maybe not this quickly but that's besides the point. Epics are more likely to be designed in such a way as to offer a specific playstyle or powers that differs from other ATs. In CoH the Epics were designed with unique powers and versatile build options. They were not better in terms of power....just different. This was true of the Squids when they were released in 2005 and the Spiders in 2008. In fact Khelds required a buff to balance them better with other ATs. I just cannot agree that the natural evolution of Epics is that they are going to be 'better'.

Quote:

Even if this is the case, I don't expect that allowing people to either buy the new AT with real-money-backed Stars or grind for it by purchasing it on the auction house with IGC will be a problem. Pay to Win is mostly only a real problem for competitive, PVP-based games. I expect CoT to be more of a cooperative, PVE based game (like CoX was) and I expect everybody will be able to set their own difficulty to whatever they need it to be to get through their missions solo.

When you have one class that is obviously better than others in a team game you will find the demand for that class raises and the inclusion of other classes falls. So in order to win you need to pay for the better class. I do agree that p2w is a larger issue in competitive games but it still has a huge drawback in co-operative ones as well. If you want to see this type of co-operative game exclusion in practice go take a look at Neverwinter and see the demands for a specific gear rating that players require to even consider you worthy to team with.

Quote:

Will there be PVP, yes, but it won't be the kind of "go to the PVP zone and hope you don't get ganked by Epics" type of PVP, it will be more the Arena-style "join a PVP group and do team vs. team fights or 1 on 1" which are the type of PVP events where they have rules. Like "bring your best Scrapper, its scrappers only" or "everyone is level 5, just for fun" or, maybe "Epics only" or"No Epics". These sorts of PVP contests tend to have some form or rules to attempt to make it somewhat fair.

We have heard little about PvP beyond that it will follow the same rules as PvE and that it will not be the focus of the game at all. Any rules imposed by the players involved in PvP would be to change the dynamic of the contest, be it for entertainment or to correct an imbalance in power. If the game requires players to self impose limits on PvP in order to ensure balance then there is a major problem with PvP. Competitive gameplay is only hurt by allowing a player to purchase an advantage over others for real money. Surely you must see this.

Quote:

So the only thing having a "better Epic" would do is allow those people to crank up their difficulty settings and thus maybe get better swag as a result, and even that swag part is based on the expectation that getting swag will be dependent on being able to blow through missions quickly to get IGC and item drops. For all we know getting stuff in COT might be a totally different, mechanically..

I just don't agree with this...for the reasons I have just mentioned.
As for 'swag', the actual mechanic for collection is still up in the air but it is not a stretch to assume it will be based on the idea that completing goals will offer rewards. If these 'better Epics' make completing those goals easier or quicker than the games has designed to be balanced then you introduce a destabilizing agent into the mix which changes the entire game balance metric.

Quote:

MY MM in CoX could cfrank up the difficulty and trudge through a mission map way more efficiently (in terms of swag per minute spent playing him) than any of my other ATs (granted most of them were Defenders).

You have a healthy respect for MM's from CoH. Without getting into an argument over the capabilities of a particular AT in that game, I would like to say that your opinion of the MM's capabilities is subjective. The reason why you can be 'right' in thinking MM's were better and I can be 'right' when I think they were worse is because AT's were each designed to offer a different game play experience. The second you set out to create an AT universally accepted (or as close as possible to universally accepted) as better you have destroyed the foundation of variety in game play experience. You are now funneling all playstyle towards a single choice. Sure some players may attempt to balance themselves on the broken remains of that foundation and continue to play a variety of other AT's but those players will have a constrained experience. This may be a bit hyperbolic but the core of my opinion is valid....Designing a specifically advantageous class will not be beneficial to the game overall.

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
I understand your concerns

I understand your concerns about power level and demand for Epics, etc. I really do. I remember when, in the first year of CoH, EVERYONE was a Blaster (furthermore, an Assault Rifle/Devices Blaster often named "TOTALLYnotThePunisher").

If there's even a NARROW edge to one build that says "build X is THE BEST, but not by much, but still THE BEST" then there are people who will build it that way for that reason. Some players behave like sheep and just make whatever other people have already determined is THE BEST. There were also people in CoH that would make other "not as good" toons just for the sake of wanting to do so. I made mostly Defenders because I loved doing TFs and wanted to get on as many as I could, for example.

I'm not talking about designing Epics to be some kind of day-and-night, TOTALLY UBER class that hands-down beats everything else walking away, I would intend for it to be MARGINALLY better in general (probably with some strong and weak areas when you look at it in detail) but I don't expect any new class that gets rolled out later (well after launch) to be strictly worse than the average already-existing classes either. I can see it being more complicated to play, more challenging, more difficult/expensive to build for in terms of slotting, etc, but I would expect all of that to be the price you pay for a toon that has some small increase in overall power or potential power than the ones you had access to before. If the new Epic thing is strictly worse than the average existing ATs, it will disappoint. Say what you want about Kheldians, whether or not they lived up to it, the expectation when they first came out was that they'd be a "good" class to play. To some extent they were a disappointment to the minmax players for that reason. If you make a new thing, like an Epic, and most people are lukewarm on whether or not they even care or want one, then I'd call that a flop, personally.

As for people excluding others based on gear, that's a problem which is mostly about how the gear system works and the difficulty level of the game overall for raids. I don't think the relative strengths and weaknesses of the classes, per se, are the root cause of that. Also, that is something CoX never had, and CoX HAD classes that were considered "better than average" at different times. There was the City of Blasters era early on, there was the "herd and burn" era, etc. People still made and played different stuff and though TFs tried to get a good mix of ATs to fill out teams, there was never "you have to have this many procs and Uniques to do this TF" as a general thing. I don't think having an Epic that people find desirable to have is going to cause the sort of massive exclusionary practices that you mentioned from other games. It think the causes of that are the difficulty levels of the content itself and the fact that those games force people to work really hard to successfully complete raids. CoX always kept most stuff easy enough that nobody gave anyone a hard time over builds, for the most part.

As for PVP, my opinion on that is like this: there's a GOOD reason why Jhonny Gonzales (former featherweight champion of boxing) never fought Evander Holyfield (heavyweight champ) for the world heavyweight championship. He was out classed. Some fights just aren't fair, and everyone knows it. This is why the boxing world has weight classes and PVP should have categories of fights as well, in my opinion. Whether or not the Epic AT is strictly the best option in PVP, PVP fights will need to take into account whether or not the fight proposed in any case is too one-sided to be fun for everyone involved. Nobody plays 5 on 2 basketball or agrees to play chess against someone where the opponent starts with three queens and get's to take two moves per turn. The PVP community already knows that sad truth anyway, and will adjust to that and come up with some sort of fairness rules of it's own, or else if it doesn't, PVP will suck for the singular reason that everyone wants to annihilate everyone else in unfair fights they can't lose, which is no fun for anyone in the first place, so nobody agrees to it.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: I'm not talking about
Quote:

I'm not talking about designing Epics to be some kind of day-and-night, TOTALLY UBER class that hands-down beats everything else walking away, I would intend for it to be MARGINALLY better in general (probably with some strong and weak areas when you look at it in detail) but I don't expect any new class that gets rolled out later (well after launch) to be strictly worse than the average already-existing classes either.

I never thought you meant anything but marginally better. This caveat does not change my opinion on the subject. Setting out to design something as generally accepted to be better at the majority of game play is harmful to the game overall. Its a slippery slope that leads down a path of accelerated power creep. Its even worse when its designed that way in an effort to make it more attractive a real money purchase as now earning expectations and simple greed enter the equation. It becomes completely unacceptable when multiple purchases are required to get the full experience. I just don't think extra power...regardless of how much extra power... is the right way to make Epics appealing.

Quote:

If the new Epic thing is strictly worse than the average existing ATs, it will disappoint. .

Just because something is not 'better' does not automatically make it worse. I don't think I have said they should be worse than other ATs. I am pretty sure I advocated they be held up to the same metric as all other ATs and that they offer a different play experience pretty clearly.

Quote:

Say what you want about Kheldians, whether or not they lived up to it, the expectation when they first came out was that they'd be a "good" class to play. To some extent they were a disappointment to the minmax players for that reason. If you make a new thing, like an Epic, and most people are lukewarm on whether or not they even care or want one, then I'd call that a flop, personally.

At first there was the misguided complaints that Epic should mean more powerful. Once players generally understood that Epic did not mean power in CoH those complaints about power level fell in line with the same power level complaints that all classes suffer. After that the most common complaint about Kelds was the forced appearance change. This complaint was so common that almost every post in the Kheld thread was about single form builds.
The devs of CoH learned from this and when they designed the spiders they did so with minimal forced appearance. Even still they found that Widows were by a far margin the most popular choice which was attributed to a combined factor of greater options in build for the Widow and the forced costume part of the Soldier.
Sadly I have no way to prove that this was the case so you can either take my word on it or not.
The point I am making is that power level is not the only reason why something would be met with lukewarm response.

Quote:

I can see it being more complicated to play, more challenging, more difficult/expensive to build for in terms of slotting, etc, but I would expect all of that to be the price you pay for a toon that has some small increase in overall power or potential power than the ones you had access to before.

This would be part of the game design balancing I was talking about. There is nothing wrong with designing an AT to be better in some areas and worse in others. It's this type of balancing that gave us tanks and scrappers that were (arguably) balanced...tans had better armor and weaker attacks while scrappers had better attacks and weaker armor....this is of course a very simplistic view of the balancing design overall but work well enough for our discussion here. The reason why someone might consider one better than the other is, as I said previously, that players personal play style (for lack of a better word to signify the myriad of reason one would consider something better than something else). I wish you had expressed this opinion on game balance previously...especially when I brought up balance in my first post.

Quote:

As for people excluding others based on gear, that's a problem which is mostly about how the gear system works and the difficulty level of the game overall for raids. I don't think the relative strengths and weaknesses of the classes, per se, are the root cause of that..

Please go back and read that entire portion of my post. I was not commenting on gear but on the way players will exclude others based on a definable better and worse factor in co-operative games. I used Neverwinter and its gear value system because it is a shocking example of that type of exclusion.

Quote:

As for PVP, my opinion on that is like this: ((SNIP)).

This is not the place to discuss how PvP should be designed. Feel free to start a thread about PvP and we can discuss your thoughts there.

As far as Epics are concerned I will again state my position on power level.
To me it would be harmful to the game for the reasons I have stated to design an AT...even an Epic to be better than the other AT's.
The better choice in design (IMO) is to offer something new...it could be new challenges, new missions, new powers, new build options or a new play style. Simply turning the damage volume up is a lazy and ultimately uninteresting design choice.

Doctor Tyche
Doctor Tyche's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 4 weeks ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/04/2012 - 11:29
There are multiple mechanisms

There are multiple mechanisms for Epic's as well. Consider Final Fantasy XIV for a moment, where their version of the epic archetypes are unlockable classes for your existing characters. For example, you raise your level in Archer and Thaumaturge on a single character in order to unlock it.

Technical Director

Read enough Facebook and you have to make Sanity Checks. I guess FB is the Great Old One of the interent these days... - Beamrider

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: There are multiple
Quote:

There are multiple mechanisms for Epic's as well. Consider Final Fantasy XIV for a moment, where their version of the epic archetypes are unlockable classes for your existing characters. For example, you raise your level in Archer and Thaumaturge on a single character in order to unlock it.

I have not played FFXIV...I think the last FF I played was 8 and I didn't finish it.
This type of Epic sounds a lot like Prestige options from D&D. Correct me if I am wrong....but isn't this type of Epic usually something a character earns during the leveling process and not one that signifies a new class? What I mean is that its not technically a new class but instead an addition to an existing class.... usually one of a few choices.

If its is the way I describe above then this could be an interesting feature for a characters progression. I am not sure how this could be done well in CoT as that type of branching character progression is usually limited to games where classes are very narrowly defined in role and powers where diversity of gameplay is less common that what CoT is promising.

Could you expand on this more.... (with the understanding that this is just a discussion and not a promise or expectation from you or the game)?

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
I haven't played any of the

I haven't played any of the Final Fantasy games either, but I watched a friend of mine play one of them (back in like 2001-2, whichever one that was). If I had to draw a parallel to CoX, what Doc describes reminds me more of Incarnate, or perhaps the Ancillary Mastery Pools than Kheldians and Spiders.

In the end though, honestly, it's all good to me.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
If its an incarnate style of

If its an incarnate style of power expansion I am not for it at all. I honestly think the entire Incarnate system in CoH was the worst feature they ever included.
If its ancillary pools then its not at all like an Epic AT IMO.
Like I said I would like it if Tyche could clear it up for me so I can discuss it on equal footing. Well...I would like it cleared up only if he wasn't busy making the game.

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 day ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
FFXIV actually calls those

FFXIV actually calls those jobs since they are much more a specialization of classes since they only add a few skills and may modify some aspects of the base class. They also don't level by them self but rather use the level of the base class, which was the reason I pulled every class to 15 so I could have all jobs of a class once I hit 30 on that class.

The major difference with FFXIV (to most other games) is that you can change to any and every class (including crafting and gathering) by just changing to that classes weapon type, think you just needed to take its "intro quest" first to "unlock" it. So drawing any class related parallells in regards to unlocking will be hard to do.

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: FFXIV actually calls
Quote:

FFXIV actually calls those jobs since they are much more a specialization of classes since they only add a few skills and may modify some aspects of the base class. They also don't level by them self but rather use the level of the base class,

I must be missing something because the way this sounds it is actually a step back in customization from what we had in CoH.
We have enhancements to provide modification to the base class, power and ancillary pools for extra skills and we will already be leveling.

This sounds like it would limit that customization to specific choices. I have to be wrong or I must be missing something.

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 day ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
islandtrevor72 wrote: Quote:
islandtrevor72 wrote:

Quote: FFXIV actually calls those jobs since they are much more a specialization of classes since they only add a few skills and may modify some aspects of the base class. They also don't level by them self but rather use the level of the base class, I must be missing something because the way this sounds it is actually a step back in customization from what we had in CoH.
We have enhancements to provide modification to the base class, power and ancillary pools for extra skills and we will already be leveling.This sounds like it would limit that customization to specific choices. I have to be wrong or I must be missing something.

Reading it again I think he was talking about the unlock mechanic rather then how EAT's would be "functioning/formed" in relation to normal AT's. That is, get two (or more) AT's/power sets to specific levels to unlock a specific EAT.

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
I don't see that as what he

I don't see that as what he meant... The way its worded makes it seem his focus was on the actual class and the way to unlock was an after thought.
I could be wrong.
If all he meant was 2 AT's or powers at certain levels I would find that a very boring unlock mechanic.

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 day ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Well, without further

Well, without further clarification we both are just speculating.

Personally I'm hoping that neither is how it is in FFXIV. That is that EAT's are designed from the ground up to be completely independent classes and that the unlocking is a bit more involved than just getting levels (regardless of if it's one character to max or getting two or more classes/power sets to a specific level).

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Agreed. Its why I think

Agreed. Its why I think account badges, missions and TFs in any combination is more interesting.

But I am not against the idea of prestige classes (or jobs or specialization or whatever they would be called) as well as Epic ATs.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 hours 32 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
There's the question of what

There's the question of what an 'Epic Archetype' IS, or should be... In CoH they were supposed to be 'epic' as in a great story. Yet, for the Players, 'epic' always seemed to mean more powerful and their demand certainly seemed to bear fruit for the VEATs.

In my experience, Kheldians were... not so much 'more powerful', as they were more Flexible. In Nova form, they were 'flying gunships', Hover-Blasters, and in Dwarf form, they were respectable Light-Tankers. In Human form, they were 'Blappers with Shields', able to hold their own in combat at any range, and extremely versatile. Their handicap was that they could not be all of those things, they didn't have enough enhancement slots, even with the efficiencies offered by Set IOs.

On the other hand, Arachnos Soldiers... they could easily specialize into becoming... seriously OP. Or, they could eschew the specialization and still be much more potent than the average AT. My Huntsman was clearly a 'Blaster with Shields', who could also buff up his teammates, and running in tandem with another Soldier? Massively OP, as they reinforced each other.

So, what would _I_ like in an 'Epic' AT? More flexibility, more powers, more Kinds of powers... Like 'Quaternary' power pools, and/or enough power-slots and enhancement-slots to choose and run a second 'Tertiary' pool. So, one could actually run a 'Flying Blaster/Blapper with Shields and a little utility healing'. It would be interesting if the EAT could choose Any Primary and Secondary (or 'Double Primary') and explore the possibilities of the unreleased AT combos.

However, to Earn this Epic AT and unlock the power, I'd want to have demonstrated, in some way, that I know how to Run different ATs, successfully. That way, when I unlock the Epic powers, I can handle it, without shooting myself in the foot.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Izzy
Izzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/09/2013 - 11:09
VEAT was: Villans Epic

VEAT was: Villains Epic ArcheType?
HEAT was: Heroes Epic ArcheType?

Bring the HEAT! ;D

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: In my experience,
Quote:

In my experience, Kheldians were... not so much 'more powerful', as they were more Flexible. In Nova form, they were 'flying gunships', Hover-Blasters, and in Dwarf form, they were respectable Light-Tankers. In Human form, they were 'Blappers with Shields', able to hold their own in combat at any range, and extremely versatile. Their handicap was that they could not be all of those things, they didn't have enough enhancement slots, even with the efficiencies offered by Set IOs..

In my experience you could create true monster WSs and moderate monster PBs. I remember my human form WS having effectively a permanently capped resist to everything and was soft capped in defence. I might have the mids file still if you want to see it (not here in PM...I doubt it would interest too many others).

Quote:

On the other hand, Arachnos Soldiers... they could easily specialize into becoming... seriously OP. Or, they could eschew the specialization and still be much more potent than the average AT. My Huntsman was clearly a 'Blaster with Shields', who could also buff up his teammates, and running in tandem with another Soldier? Massively OP, as they reinforced each other.

The spiders could be built as force multipliers. All ATs had the capability to be this as well but the spiders were the true masters of it.
I think the idea that the spiders were inherently stronger comes more from when they were released and the simplicity in building an effective character rather than their actual power.
They were released about a year after IO's were....just enough time for the majority of players to understand the overall power increase that all AT's could get. Because they were new and exciting that's where the knowledge of IO's was used first by many players. Meanwhile the Kehlds were all but dismissed as ineffective due to many not understanding how to build them well.
Which brings me to the simplicity in building. The spiders were designed in a better way than the Kehlds concerning the way they could be built and the style of play associated with them. Kehlds required a conscious choice in how they were built to take advantage of the benefits but because of the way they were design this was not clear....this resulted in many people building for everything a Kheld could do instead of focusing on one of the forms.
The spiders had an obvious and definitive point where building a character branched into specific choices. This design choice funneled even the less knowledgeable players towards an effective build.
This gave the illusion that VEATs were more powerful when it was actually release timing and design simplicity that made them only seem more powerful. At least that's my take on it.
There is also the personal play styles of people to consider....for me, my Soldiers only had a fraction of the capabilities of my Night Widow or the my WS which in turn had less power than my Scrapper, Dom and Brute. Its a matter of personal view which AT ...including Epics ...that were the most powerful.

Quote:

So, what would _I_ like in an 'Epic' AT? More flexibility, more powers, more Kinds of powers... Like 'Quaternary' power pools, and/or enough power-slots and enhancement-slots to choose and run a second 'Tertiary' pool. So, one could actually run a 'Flying Blaster/Blapper with Shields and a little utility healing'. It would be interesting if the EAT could choose Any Primary and Secondary (or 'Double Primary') and explore the possibilities of the unreleased AT combos..

I am not sure what you mean by 'Quaternary'. Do you mean 4 sided or the geological period?
As for the rest....specifics aside...I agree completely that Epic AT should have aspects that are not found in any other AT (although the flying blaster/blapper with shields and utility healing was something a PB could do very well). However they are designed ...they should offer something unique.

Quote:

However, to Earn this Epic AT and unlock the power, I'd want to have demonstrated, in some way, that I know how to Run different ATs, successfully. That way, when I unlock the Epic powers, I can handle it, without shooting myself in the foot.

I agree that they should be earned but them requiring some form of 'proof' as a prerequisite seems unnecessary unless the Epic has some extensive new gameplay mechanic in its design. I mean its just a new AT, not a new game.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 hours 32 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
islandtrevor72 wrote: I am
islandtrevor72 wrote:

I am not sure what you mean by 'Quaternary'. Do you mean 4 sided or the geological period?

Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, Quaternary. 'Forth-rank'.

Yes, my 'Pure-Human' Kheldian did all of that pretty well, too. And, despite IOs, he really needed another 5-10 enhancements slots and/or better modifiers for damage and defense. I never did get my Warshade to 'MF' status, probably just not in my playstyle to do so.

Be Well!
Fireheart

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: Primary, Secondary,
Quote:

Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, Quaternary. 'Forth-rank'.

I know what the word means...I don't know what you mean in using it cause power pools already had 4 ranks. I thought you might have used the word wrong and meant to say 4 separate power 'Sets' not pools.
Either that or there was some clever science slang that had to do with geological time periods I didn't now.
Can you explain it a bit differently?

Quote:

Yes, my 'Pure-Human' Kheldian did all of that pretty well, too. And, despite IOs, he really needed another 5-10 enhancements slots and/or better modifiers for damage and defense. I never did get my Warshade to 'MF' status, probably just not in my playstyle to do so..

I can see that....PB's were an AT that wasn't suited to everyone, I personally never had an issue with slots for my PB but I really found it a dull character to play. Of all the AT's the only one I enjoyed playing less was my MM...

Interdictor
Interdictor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:26
Fireheart wrote: Yes, my
Fireheart wrote:

Yes, my 'Pure-Human' Kheldian did all of that pretty well, too.

Just chiming in on my love for my Humanform PB. LOVED the versatility it offered. Didn't really get to max out my Humanform WS, but I had a lot of fun with him as well (though it was sometimes difficult to pull off some of the abilities, like the corpse-bombs)

Quote:

And, despite IOs, he really needed another 5-10 enhancements slots and/or better modifiers for damage and defense. I never did get my Warshade to 'MF' status, probably just not in my playstyle to do so.

Just remember that Khelds also had their inherent powers that the devs had to consider when it came to balance. A PB or WS on a full team was much more powerful than one going solo. Though, yeah, even with frankenslotting I always felt like I needed just a few more enhancement slots.

Izzy
Izzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/09/2013 - 11:09
Interdictor wrote: ..my love
Interdictor wrote:

..my love for my Humanform PB. LOVED the versatility it offered. Didn't really get to max out my Humanform WS, but I had a lot of fun with him as well (though it was sometimes difficult to pull off some of the abilities, like the corpse-bombs)

I did roll a PB, called him Otherworlder and made him look kinda mean for a blue skinned baldy. Thinking back, he looked very much like a Super Saiyan (Dragon Ball Z). :P
Got him to level 50, but didn't feel the need to slot IO Sets, which is Weird, since its was littery an Epic ArcheType. But I never wanted to roll, level up Another again. :P
People whined all throughout my Teaming to level 50, "Ohh its YOUR Fault we wiped, Stupid Cists Crystals!" :P
I take it to heart, so No more Peanut Butter and jelly for me. :[
After the Devs nerfed the PB's, they forgot to also lower the difficulty of the PB's Nemesis'es. They stayed the same difficulty, making it less likely for the PB to jump in at Higher levels and Clean Up His/Her OWN MESS for being there and take lead in dealing with his own Nemesis foe(s)!
Another reason I never rolled another PB, or stayed on my PB for TFs. Too much complaining by others. :P Not too toooo much, but still... Speed runs were out of the question. :P

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: Just chiming in on my
Quote:

Just chiming in on my love for my Humanform PB. LOVED the versatility it offered. Didn't really get to max out my Humanform WS, but I had a lot of fun with him as well (though it was sometimes difficult to pull off some of the abilities, like the corpse-bombs).

Heh....even here we still see 'human form' for khelds. Just goes to show that forcing a cosmetic change on a character is unpopular. It was probably the biggest complaint about stone armor....I know I hated the dried turd look of it.
PB...I found...were suited to a 2 form playstyle better than the WS....made them a lot more versatile. WSs had a lot of powers that were difficult to use or were counter intuitive. It helped me to think of WSs as blappers with an even stronger focus on melee. Which is kinda funny because that was almost exactly what the Soldier was and yet I hated the Soldier and loved the WS. Might have to do with the WSs AoEs.

Quote:

Just remember that Khelds also had their inherent powers that the devs had to consider when it came to balance. A PB or WS on a full team was much more powerful than one going solo. Though, yeah, even with frankenslotting I always felt like I needed just a few more enhancement slots..

I'll be honest, until you brought this up I hadn't even considered the Inherent of the Epics. It might be because for Khelds the inherent was usually not something you could design for....it required other players to even work...it just was not a reliable aspect for the most part. For the Spiders the inherent was just there...small buff to health and regen. Neither...to me at least...felt like a defining aspect of the AT in the way Brutes Fury, Scrappers Criticals or Controllers Containment did. The Epic Inherents for both sides felt more like a bonus to me.

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: After the Devs nerfed
Quote:

After the Devs nerfed the PB's, they forgot to also lower the difficulty of the PB's Nemesis'es. They stayed the same difficulty, making it less likely for the PB to jump in at Higher levels and Clean Up His/Her OWN MESS for being there and take lead in dealing with his own Nemesis foe(s)!

When did the PB's get a nerf? I remember them getting a buff in issue 11 or 12...somewhere in the midst of all the massive improvements the game got like power set proliferation and Ouroboros.

The nemesis style system for Khelds was a VERY poorly design system IMO. Instead of simply creating a reoccurring foe group that was dangerous to the Khelds...they made one which made any encounter with them dangerous to the entire group. It didn't help that originally the damage type this group had was untyped so it bypassed any resist and was only protected by positional defence.

Follies
Follies's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 05/24/2014 - 08:08
Just weighing in here. I

Just weighing in here. I really never liked the way EATs were done in COH. From a character conception point of view I never wanted to play a symbiotic half alien half human or a widow or spider soldier. Seemed very uninteresting and I felt like I was being boxed into the concept of these character ATs. This is what I hated about EATs in COH so I very rarely played them. That being said, if in COT you can make EATs that are not placed into a box but are less restricted in concept, then I think I would like very much to play one. Just saying.

I reserve the right to have an opinion. You reserve the right to not agree.

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: Just weighing in here.
Quote:

Just weighing in here. I really never liked the way EATs were done in COH. From a character conception point of view I never wanted to play a symbiotic half alien half human or a widow or spider soldier.

We have been pretty much focusing on the power of the Epics and not so much on the concept of them that's true.
I have to say that I agree with you for the most part. I would like Epics to have a connection to the lore of the game but like you I would very much dislike that connection be one of core character concept.

I expressed a wish earlier to have the CoT Epics be a kind of homage to all of the ATs from CoH (post 11) in the form of old style heroes resurfacing. While that wish is very unlikely to ever be fulfilled, some kind of legacy nod would still be nice.

Izzy
Izzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/09/2013 - 11:09
PB's... not sure which issue.

PB's... not sure which issue. bad memory. But, players complained in the old CoH forums. :/

Instead of EAT's, you want a way to AUGMENT the existing powers in a powerset?
Or perhaps a way to Unlock MORE Power pools at 50? :D

After 50, you dont go up in level, but you can still Train up with new powers from the Unlocked Pools. ;)
No longer vertical, Horizontal.

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: PB's... not sure which
Quote:

PB's... not sure which issue. bad memory. But, players complained in the old CoH forums. :/

I did a quick search and can't find anything on a nerf for them...unless you mean ED....which hit every AT.

Quote:

Instead of EAT's, you want a way to AUGMENT the existing powers in a powerset?.

Me personally? No. I like the idea of an entirely separate AT too much to abandon it.

Quote:

Or perhaps a way to Unlock MORE Power pools at 50? :D
After 50, you dont go up in level, but you can still Train up with new powers from the Unlocked Pools. ;)
No longer vertical, Horizontal.

Honestly I never viewed more powers as horizontal growth. Either they add to the overall capabilities of a character or they are superfluous.
As I said, I am not against a sort of divergent prestige option for each AT in addition to Epics....but I think those prestige options should come during a characters growth. Mid level characters choosing a specialization is the way I would personally like to see this occur. The biggest reason for this is to keep all ATs balanced as much as possible. If it comes at max level then its either the added power or the waste of time I describe 'horizontal growth' as.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 hours 32 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
Yes, I decoupled my human

Yes, I decoupled my human-form PB from the 'alien symbiote' Lore and connected his story to a completely different mythology. If 'Epic' means 'chained to some specific Lore', then that's not what I want. I certainly don't mind (voluntarily) tying my character's story to some in-game Lore, but I like to pick, choose, and adapt.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Foradain
Foradain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 days 5 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 21:06
I'm hoping that if there are

I'm hoping that if there are any "Epic Archetypes" created for CoT, they either aren't done until all of the planned class/spec combos and all the blank spaces in the UCSC are released, or they fill in one of those gaps. Not the ones with the dashed lines through them, but the blank ones like Control/Manipulation and Pets/Defense.

Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
Foradain's Character Conclave
Millennium City Refugee.
Avatar courtesy of Satellite9

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
One of those could BE the

One of those could BE the Epic.

Foradain
Foradain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 days 5 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 21:06
Right, that would be the "or

Right, that would be the "or they fill in one of those gaps" option.

Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
Foradain's Character Conclave
Millennium City Refugee.
Avatar courtesy of Satellite9

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Sorry...I meant the ones that

Sorry...I meant the ones that have the dashed lines. Reading it now I see I wasn't clear.

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Fireheart wrote: Yes, I
Fireheart wrote:

Yes, I decoupled my human-form PB from the 'alien symbiote' Lore and connected his story to a completely different mythology. If 'Epic' means 'chained to some specific Lore', then that's not what I want. I certainly don't mind (voluntarily) tying my character's story to some in-game Lore, but I like to pick, choose, and adapt.Be Well!
Fireheart

I agree with Fireheart on this point. Please do not force me into a specific origin story or background for my Epic toon just because it's Epic. I'd rather decide that stuff for myself, for all my toons.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Izzy
Izzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/09/2013 - 11:09
Radiac wrote: Fireheart
Radiac wrote:

Fireheart wrote: Yes, I decoupled my human-form PB from the 'alien symbiote' Lore and connected his story to a completely different mythology. If 'Epic' means 'chained to some specific Lore', then that's not what I want. I certainly don't mind (voluntarily) tying my character's story to some in-game Lore, but I like to pick, choose, and adapt.Be Well!
FireheartI agree with Fireheart on this point. Please do not force me into a specific origin story or background for my Epic toon just because it's Epic. I'd rather decide that stuff for myself, for all my toons.

How the heck do you make that?

Make the AT more Free Form? Close to it? :P

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: How the heck do you
Quote:

How the heck do you make that?
Make the AT more Free Form? Close to it? :P
.

The same way they made a Blaster, Tank or Mastermind. An Epic can have as much or as little Lore attached to it as the devs decide.
In my case I like a bit of lore in my Epic AT but not if that lore is of a core character concept. So no professions, motives or goals but can include a very general origin (for example: these guys went into hiding during a government crackdown period or are from a period where all heroes and villains were abducted from the planet to compete in a 'Secret war').
In Firehearts and Radiacs case they don't even want the very general origin...basically they are just a different AT with no lore attached (if I am wrong they can correct me).

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
islandtrevor72's

islandtrevor72's interpretation accurately describes my position on Epics vis a vis their origins.
I mean look, if they ABSOLUTELY MUST connect the Epic ATs to the lore of the game (like the crab spiders and widows) then I'm not going to complain too much. The Kheldians, to me, were mostly made up for the purposes for the Epic AT in the first place and felt a little "tacked on" as lore pieces in the first place,I felt. I would prefer just having a new class or whatever that is fun and has it's own unique quirks but no official lore strings attached, but if they decide to go the way of CoX and make them lore-heavy, I'll probably still make one, but I hope that they're more like the Arachnos Epic ATs, in the sense that at least those had some lore background in the game BEFORE they became Epic ATs.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: I mean look, if they
Quote:

I mean look, if they ABSOLUTELY MUST connect the Epic ATs to the lore of the game (like the crab spiders and widows) then I'm not going to complain too much.

I am pretty sure the reason why the Epics in CoH were so Lore heavy was to allow for a specific story to be told. A story that qualifies the title of 'Epic" for these ATs.

One way to provide a lore element to the Epics while still making it optional would be with the use of the Path system. One player of an Epic could opt into a 'path of the epic' and experience all the lore through game play while another player could simply opt into any other path in the game and be excluded from that lore.
I personally don't like this idea as its unlikely that either choice a player makes will be all that satisfying for the majority... but its a possible compromise.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 hours 32 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
The Lore for Arachnos

The Lore for Arachnos Soldiers made sense and coupled with the Costume restrictions, tied into the Story we were fed while playing, it was very consistent. With all of that channelizing, there wasn't a lot of room to create a different story. Actually, a LOT of Redside missions 'forced' the Story on characters - just another reason why I disliked Redside. I dislike Goldside for similar reasons - there were no 'good' choices in those stories, only 'bad' or 'worse', so there were no chances to establish my own 'alignment'.

I hesitate to use the term 'Freeform', but that does accurately describe what I'd like in a EAT. Not quite as 'free' as CO does, but I might love playing a character with two 'Primary' and one 'Secondary' powerpools, or one 'Primary' and two 'Secondary', or just two 'Primary' and a bunch of 'Tertiary' for utility. I guess my point is, I'd like the powers to be 'full-strength', not weakened by 'AT modifiers', and to have enough slots to get the full effect out of those powers.

Be Well!
Fireheart

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote: I'd like the powers to
Quote:

I'd like the powers to be 'full-strength', not weakened by 'AT modifiers'.

Can you explain what you mean by this?

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 hours 32 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
islandtrevor72 wrote: Can you
islandtrevor72 wrote:

Can you explain what you mean by this?

Controller Damage was lower than average, even accounting for DoTs and the Devs had to introduce 'Containment' in order to bring it up. Tankers seemed, to me, to do less damage, even than having Damage being only a Secondary powerpool would account for.

I know that the various ATs got Bonuses to certain powers, but I'm not expecting that.

Maybe my ancient recollections are faulty.

Be Well!
Fireheart

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
I m asking what you mean by

I m asking what you mean by 'full-strength' and 'AT modifiers'.
For example in CoH there was a base damage modifier for each AT. Blasters got a + to this base damage modifier while defenders got a - for example. If I remember correctly Tanks had a +/-0 modifier (could be wrong). This is not exactly how CoH did it, but its close enough for my purposes.

When you say 'full-strength' using CoH as a guideline (as we have for all the discussion here) it would indicate a base damage modifier of +/-0....but when you look at the way you use it in your description it seems to imply a different meaning.
If you are talking about damage levels influenced by Inherent powers I would be even more confused. Inherent powers like Containment, Fury or Criticals did not change the base damage modifier of an AT but instead offered an additional bonus if a specific criteria was met. And even then not all ATs had Inherent powers that modified damage.
I'm just trying to understand what you actually mean by 'full-strength' and 'AT modifiers' as a requirement for your ideal Epic design.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 hours 32 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
Well, it seems that you

Well, it seems that you understand me just fine. I mean, 'without negative modifiers' to any of the effects.

Be Well!
Fireheart

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
k

k

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 hours 56 min ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Best "unlock" system I can

Best "unlock" system I can think of for Epic Titans (ETs?) would be that achieving a specific Character Level in a Primary/Secondary/Tertiary grants you a Token. This would be an account wide thing, so the first character to reach the threshold in any given Primary/Secondary/Tertiary grants a Token, but the second and subsequent character to do the same thing does not get a Token. This means that your first character to reach ... say ... Level 30 ... would earn you 3 Tokens, one each for Primary/Secondary/Tertiary.

Yes, at heart this is a "make lots of DIFFERENT characters" incentive system geared towards being an Altaholic.

Purchasing the right to create an Epic Titan costs Tokens earned from the above accomplishments. If you delete the Epic Titan (to reroll?), you get those Tokens refunded to your account. The Token price would be PER Epic Titan you can create ... meaning if you want to make more Epic Titans on your account you need to go Level more Alts. Set the price as being something like 10 Tokens, meaning a minimum of 4 character Alts (since 3*3=9) and you've got your Free Form Permission Slips for being able to create an Epic Titan.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
DeathSentry
DeathSentry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/08/2013 - 10:00
Wondering..would it be

Wondering..would it be possible to have "archtypes" at 50 which allow for freeform selection with some constraints? Would be a bonus to those reaching 50 and given the power standardization, hopefully they are not more powerful than an archtype based toon

CoH addict for 8+ years...and counting

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
I remember the devs saying

I remember the devs saying they did not want to include 'freeform' as it is more work to balance than it is worth in gain and free form character creation systems are counter to the concept of players making alternate characters.