If a tactic worked people will do it. I myself used Pulling a few times when a group turned out to tough. Of course I find out they were tough by charging in with mad drive. Heck I do pulling tactics playing my Skyrim.

From what I understand pulling won't work in CoT. The AI in Unreal 4 a bit smarter then that. How much so and will the Devs tone down the brains in the Groups I don't know.

Pulling is, was and should be a viable tactic in MMOs like these. The only problem I see in your perspective is the limited use of the term "pulling".

Line of Sight, IMO, is likely the bane of most AI and it is the crux of why "pulling" is continued to be used today. In most modern games and in CoH, you use LoS to draw aggro to a particular spot. At that spot, you AoE/trap/cleave through as many foes as possible to maximize activation times. The thing is, you're seeing pulling as drawing 1 target in to kill them and then moving onto the next one when that isn't always the result or even the desired effect. Many times, people pull not only to draw 1 target but to simply draw more targets to a specific place to trap them.

In the olden-days of CoH, before IOs and all that, when grouped with players, it was a thrill seeing mobs of reds and purples huddled close knowing that if you charged in, there was going to be death. In that instance of facing challenges likely out of your league, dividing the group for easy conquering is simply intelligent. As a player, it's akin to playing smart and it was often rewarding because there would be less death at the end. Sure it was slower than rushing in but it's also safer. The only options available if you remove tactics to handle overwhelming odds is to throw bodies at the enemy until they run out of HP (to many players, this feels like the "dumb" way to handle such a situation) or simply leave and face the same mobs when you have a higher level (the most sensible other option but to some players, this feels like the "cheap" way to handle such a situation).

Pulling should be a viable tactic in CoT because it will likely be one among several ways to handle a situation and you as a player should be given a choice instead of the game boxing you into only charge blindly at your foes.

I'm a player that tends to favor crafty-type heroes/villains because they seem the easiest to wrap my head around. I want more ways to handle bad situations, not less. As far as the level of difficulty of foes/minions affecting the frequency of such a tactic, ask yourself: Do you want to have an easy time with these enemies? If so, you likely just set the difficulty so (in CoH terms) they are white/blue. Suddenly, you're pretty much 1-shotting most things. But if you answer no, you set your difficulty higher. But what if you just 1-shot most stuff like you're requesting regardless of level?

Think about it. Not everyone plays games so they can turn their brain off and watch flashing lights on a computer screen. Some people want challenges and that won't really happen if I'm 1-shotting most of what comes at me.

As a compromise to your suggestion there, I'd definitely suggest a finer difficulty slider. Let people adjust not only the level and team-size equivalent, but also tune the level of the minions vs the Lt.s and Bosses, the ratio of Lt/Bosses to minions, ect. Then you can have your 1-shot minions while still having higher level bosses to face.

Just because The Mighty Paladin did not care for pulling does not mean that pulling must ipso facto be removed for everyone in all circumstances ever, forever (and ever) ... amen.

Whether or not pulling was a "good choice" to use depended on the circumstances and the team.

Of course, I'm ... biased ... because I'd do things like draw the aggro of FIVE RIKTI MAGUS onto myself during Mothership Raids and be holding all of their aggro on myself (Redlynne) so that they wouldn't be throwing AoE Mez at everyone at the bottom of the "pit" in the center of the ship. Eventually the "cavalry" would work their way around the rim of the ship to come and find me practically buried under a dogpile of Rikti Magus (all very angry at me) while I just kept kicking their butts out from under them (ah, MA/SR/Soul, how I miss you!) while in pure Scrapperlock. Needless to say, the "cavalry" that arrived to deliver the beatdown was usually very surprised to find that I wasn't Face Down underneath the dogpile ... even after I got something of a reputation for pulling off this stunt, repeatedly.

For me, the essential reason for Pulling was because it was safer/better/wiser to fight your Foes OVER HERE, among *your* allies, than it was to fight them OVER THERE, among *their* allies. It was tactical advantage of position.

And that's not even including pulling Foes into a "flower garden" of Trip Mines resulting in a Thoroughly Satisfying KABOOM!™

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:
there are quite a number of stories from developers where players disliked the additional difficulty of linked. AI tactics to such a degree it had to be removed from or relegated to very specific portions of the game. And in the latter instance it was not surprising to find such content underused by the player base.

It's not at all surprising that they encountered resistance when trying to modify the AI for a game people were already playing. But as I said pulling doesn't work in Dungeons & Dragons online and I've never heard anyone complain. Since this is a new game, there would likely be no problem if pulling doesn't work from the start.
Tannim222 wrote:
One shotting minions is about game balance up to a certain point (at times this was possible with certain conditions being met) but in general it was a result of the base encounter difficulty. This is more than animated comic book, it is a video game with with comic book inspired dressing. As a video game it requires some fundamental game play design. Minions in CoH represented the base encounter difficulty.
This is also why there were so many of them on teams as the encounter difficulty scaled with team size instead of either being static or using and overtly complex spawn replacement system to which their engine could not provide. And decreasing minion count with a spawn replacement system that scaled difficulty with team size would have resulted in there being less mobs in a spawn but with what amounted to dealing with elite bosses or avs on a regular basis. Thematically tons of minions to wade through was meant to represented the faceless goons the hero fights on most of the time in many comic inspired stories. Yes there was a difference in how it played out since it was a game not a story controlled by a writer.

This does not work as a way of balancing the game.
It just makes the fights take forever.
It's not fun.
I don't mind fighting my way through hoards of nameless faceless minions but when each minion takes a long time to beat, AND there are lots of them, AND they're still no match for me, so it's just a matter of time (SO much time) that's not ballance, it's just boring.
There has to be some other way. Please Someone suggest a better way.

That's cool and all but are you a dev in any kind of video game? How do you know if they aren't complaining about it and the devs just aren't changing it because of what ever reason? Do you read the dev's personal messages? Are you reading messages along the lines of getting sued because the person who sent the message can't log in? How do you know what the devs know, or heard/read, if you have never been in their position? You have to take into account of the things people say and do.... and trust me most of humanity are ass holes. Not all but the majority of them. How do I know? because I come into contact with hundreds of people every day at my job... that is how I know.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Well, this has been a serious disappointment.
I have nothing more to say.

Unfortunately, you are trying to force a particular play style. That's not going to happen. There are people that like to pull, there are people that like to strategize, and then there are people that like chaos.

I would encourage you to keep trying out the teaming thing. Eventually you'll find the right people that fits your play style and will play the way you like to play.

Yes you will run into asshats that will yell at you and not understand the way you play, but you'll also find those that won't yell at you and won't care how you play.

It also helps to be up front about things when you get on a team. Let them know you aren't a Tank that has Taunt and is more of a Skranker. This way they know not to depend on you for that.

I think a lot of people that you played with previously were people from WoW. That group is VERY particular about how things are done because they have to be. If it's not done a certain way then it's doomed to fail and then there are hours wasted for nothing.

Hopefully CoT will be a little more flexible than that and will encourage a diversity of play style from everybody. Just don't give up. Trust me, once you find that right group of people to play with it will be a game changer.

As people have said, the way "pulling" works in any given game is going to depend heavily on how the AI is designed. I can't go into too much detail, therefore, on what and how "pulling" might happen in CoT at this stage. There's a lot that's still up in the air on what we will be doing - both due to complexity and capability issues - with our AI. As Tannim said, lofty aspirations abound. We'll see what's actually practical, and then we'll be able to better discuss how such things will work.

I can say that it is not currently a consideration in our plans whether pulling will work as The Mighty Paladin outlined or not. Whether and how that tactic works will evolve from other aspects of the game, rather than be a goal in our design. (This is true of whether and how it works in just about every game. It is a tactic that evolved because players discovered how to exploit the agro and perception AI to whittle down groups of creatures. I am pretty sure it doesn't work in, for example, Ragnarok Online, as I recall friends who played the game lamenting their attack accidentally hitting the wrong creature and drawing ALL of its friends.)

Pulling makes great sense, if you don't have a Tank. Different tactics are needed for different ATs.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Heck the /Devices was build for Pulling. Cloak device sneak in lay down trip mines move back. Snipe / Pull a foe. Watch them get blown up in the minefield you just laid down. Heck throw down some Caltrops for added enjoyment. Wouldn't work if you couldn't Pull.

Just like the Holy Trinity. Pulling is a valid tactic but shouldn't be designed for. That was the beauty of CoH is that you could use different tactics as needed. Got a hard foe where the Holy Trinity works sure go for it, got a mob up ahead and want to thin down the numbers then pull. It's that we had the OPTION to do those tactics or not that helped make CoH something beyond just a standard MMORPG.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:
As to being able to attack without being noticed, and being able to defeat an npc without retaliation, it is begging for exploited, non risk behavioral play.

Not really. I'm not talking about one shotting bosses or even lieutenants, just minions. The kind of guys who should explode when we say boo.
and main villains should have abilities that let them spot us, and point us out to the minions close to them.
Yes people will take advantage, when they can, but if it makes sense then it's just good strategy, when it doesn't make sense and shouldn't work that's an exploit.
And Yes I'm aware of the fact that I'm using some words in a different sense than I have used them in the past and this could give the appearance of a contradiction but it's not. Besides, even if I don't use strategy myself I'm not opposed to letting other people use it.

Perhaps some clarity is needed here. Since the game is designed around a specific minimum expectation of an encounter difficulty that is what amount of threat an encounter poses to a standard pc which is what in the old game was represented by a minion, then to make it a standard that a minion is defeated by a standard cycled single target attack the baseline expectation goes right out the window. It certainly could be possible to one shot a standard encounter npc like a minion, though not regularly. It was possible in the old game with certain situations (hidden stalker buffed / enhanced damage attacking with assassins strike, snipes, certain t9 attacks, and others). However to imply it should be a typical occurrence would fail to take into account a lot of what is fundamental behind game design, particularly video game design.

Now that's also not to say we can take advantage of providing more underling type spawns in the game, it is something I've requested our lead writer to review on all the faction proposals to see where we might be able to place more of these type of mobs within a typical spawn, the spawn logic would need to make sure they don't result in large count where they can be abused in large quantities of xp gain but it would certainly lend itself to that sense of "guy goes down in a hit" feeling that your referencing. They wouldn't appear in every encounter, more would they be in significant number counts but it is something that we could implement more often than the old game.

In my experience, the main factor of being able to pull singles out of groups in City of Heroes involved ... Perception Debuffing ... and of all things, a very low damage attack. It was as if the Aggro Share Radius for mobs was determined by the amount of damage inflicted. Plink for light damage, they don't tell their friends and come after you by their lonesome. I noticed this behavior most specifically on my Empathy/Archery Defender, and to a lesser extent on my Storm/Dual Pistols Defender. Archery though displayed the behavior most consistently. I could just "plink" a $Target with the Tier 1 attack and often times only that one $Target would come after me [i]if it was a Minion[/i]. Lieutenants and Bosses would typically "communicate aggro" and get the group to bumrush my position, but with the Minions I was often able to single pull just by "plink" attacking with a low damage power.

It sounds to me, TheMightyPaladin, what you're actually objecting to here is allowing Foe NPCs to fail to communicate Threat. Specifically, when a single Foe NPC gains Threat, and thus becomes engaged in combat and responds, you're saying that that Threat Gain needs to be communicated to all (nearby) Foe NPCs as well, so that additional (ie. adds) engage in combat as well. Needless to say, the is primarily a concern for Ranged Attacking, in which a PC attacks an NPC from beyond the NPCs Perception (ie. aggro) radius.

I have played games where Threat and Aggro were communicated "instantly" (and for all intents and purposes, telepathically, for "free") among all mobs within a single spawn group. Aggro one, no matter how far apart they were, and you'd aggro them all. Worse, once the mobs had aggroed onto you, they ALWAYS KNEW EXACTLY WHERE YOU WERE and bumrushed towards only YOUR position ... meaning that decoys and the like were useless ... and you couldn't "hide" from an incoming bumrush, because they'd always come straight for where you ARE as opposed to where you WERE. Confronted with a choice of "which way did he go, George?" at an intersection of corridors, the mobs ALWAYS made the right choice, even (and especially) when they couldn't "see" you because there was no clear Line of Sight.

This was in Tabula Rasa ... and the excessively simple Aggro Mechanics in that game were something that I complained about to the Devs, in person, at the War College event for the game.

To give you an idea of just how ... wrong ... those mechanics were, if I was in a Team with someone else and I attacked, my Teammate would begin taking fire ... [i]even though they hadn't done anything to "earn" aggro.[/i] This was particularly egregious because one of the classes was able to equip Stealth Armor that was intended to reduce the aggro radius (ie. perception debuff). But that didn't matter. I could be 70 meters behind a Teammate, minding my own business, not drawing attention, and ought to only be earning aggro when within 10 meters or less ... and if that Teammate 70+ meters away aggroed a pack of mobs, some of them would begin shooting at me too, even though I hadn't "done" anything to earn aggro. But my Teammate had ... and the mobs INSTANTLY communicated that threat amongst themselves (for free!) and aggroed not just onto him but also onto every member of the Team as well ... for free ... and when that happened they all knew EXACTLY WHERE WE ALL WERE (because the game just gave them real-time coordinates for our locations at all times, for free) and they'd engage all of us, regardless of whether we'd "earned" aggro through our actions or not.

Needless to say, this really SUCKED for Snipers, because they'd start taking fire for things they hadn't done, and from well beyond the range at which they ought to be detectable. It was basically a "what's the point of my Stealth Armor again?" kinds of things.

It only got worse when combined with an Aggro Wipe power, because of the "for free" instant and telepathic communication of aggro between mobs. Wipe aggro from 7 out of 8 mobs and that 8th mob you didn't get would recommunicate aggro back to the other 7 and completely negate the Aggro Wipe you just used. Even worse, the aggro wipe power was set up as a "blind" type of thing, but if you tagged even one of the "blinded" mobs (while they were still "blind") then ALL OF THEM would turn and start shooting at you and bumrushing towards you in perfect synchrony, even while the "blinded" animation continued playing.

This is why Tannim's comments are so promising. Rather than aggroing onto a PC and "tracking" that PC (for free!) wherever they go, like City of Heroes and Tabula Rasa and a whole host of other games do (because it's easy to program) ... instead, NPCs are going to aggro [i]towards a location[/i] rather than towards a moving target. Once the NPC reaches that location, if they don't "find" anything there they'll initiate a Search Pattern to try and find the "lost" quarry. Such a system relies on the Perception(s) of the NPC to seek, locate, destroy based on what the NPC [b]can observe[/b] ... rather than basing it on the game just "giving" them the information straight from the database and handwaving away the rationale(s).

Any system that relies on Perception Checks in this way, rather than just [i]giving the answers FOR FREE[/i] to the NPCs, is going to necessarily include "rules" for how the NPCs ought to communicate their Perceptions Of Threats to each other. Ideally, I'd want this communication of Threat Tables between NPCs to be ... an action ... preferably a Power that uses an animation, so that you can SEE it happening when it occurs. Men In Black talk to their wrists. Mercenaries pull out a walkie-talkie and talk to it. Skyraiders touch their ear to key the microphones on their headsets. Mages point their wands. So on and so forth ... you get the idea. Communication of Threat Tables ought to be an ACTIVE Action that NPCs perform, which can be observed by Players (who ought to know what it means).

Such a system would be much more sophisticated than the aggro mechanics used in most other games, and would be something I'd personally welcome seeing in City of Titans. Why? Because it would obviously involve a "smarter" AI with observable behaviors ... which could be interrup- {sniper shot} {faceplant mob}

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

My favorite toons use regeneration as their primary defense so hit and run tactics were my favorite. More realistic AI will help me a lot too.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Of course, even if pulling does work I'll still be playing (Especially if You let me use nunchaku!)
But this gives me some hope and if different, (hopefully less time consuming) tactics are encouraged I'll be more likely to join some teams.
I'm sorry if I come across as a curmudgeon (OH Wow! I spelled that right!!!) but never forget this:
I wouldn't have so much to complain about if I hadn't loved COH enough to play it despite it's flaws.
I noticed this stuff after playing a lot for a long time. And I kept on playing even when the stuff I complain about bothered me.

You might do better next time to separate your preferences/opinions from the wider issues of overall game balance and general use of tactics versus AI by the playerbase. In other words just because you don't "like" something or "prefer" something else doesn't make it a universal truth that the entire game needs to bend to. The fact that you think doing a particular something like pulling always "takes too much time" doesn't make it broken - it simply makes it something you don't have the patience for.

Take off the rose-colored glasses sometime and realize that we all don't have to play the game in the exact same way. The Devs will make the game fun for all of us, not just you or me.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Lothic wrote:
You might do better next time to separate your preferences/opinions from the wider issues of overall game balance and general use of tactics versus AI by the playerbase. In other words just because you don't "like" something or "prefer" something else doesn't make it a universal truth that the entire game needs to bend to. The fact that you think doing a particular something like pulling always "takes too much time" doesn't make it broken - it simply makes it something you don't have the patience for.
Take off the rose-colored glasses sometime and realize that we all don't have to play the game in the exact same way. The Devs will make the game fun for all of us, not just you or me.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Two things everyone seems to be failing to notice (or ignoring)
1) I did not say we should do away with this practice just because I hate it.
I spelled out a clear argument against it:
"It Shouldn't work. first of all, what kind of bad guy gets hit by a sniper attack and goes off on his own to investigate? Why don't his friends notice? Why do they continue not noticing, as their group keeps getting smaller and smaller until there's only one left?"
2) I'm not opposed to pulling groups.
I'm only opposed to pulling one opponent at a time without the group noticing.
That means you could still pull small groups, as I suggested in the opening post.

That's the first time anyone has ever accused me of wearing rose colored glasses. (I wonder if that's really what you meant to say) I'll gladly take them off if you'll put on some reading glasses.

Among your other main complaints against pulling is that it's a "painstakingly slow, mind numbingly boring process" and that it "shouldn't be necessary because we're superheroes". What? How are those possibly objective arguments for "fixing" something you clearly assume is somehow broken?

All I'm saying is next time come up with more objective reasons for your points about changing/suggesting game mechanics instead of subjective ones. *shrugs*

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Time is a really big deal when it comes to playing a game. If an objective takes far longer than it seems like it should, it reflects negatively on the game. If it takes so much time that fighting a mob becomes a chore, I might just decide to play another game.
"We're superheroes" refers to immersion. If I'm supposed to be a superhero, why do I take longer to knock out a thug the non-super or less super characters in a lot of other games?

I appreciate that these are your opinions on the matter. I simply don't feel they are good enough evidence to change how an entire game works, at least by themselves. Who are you (or even I) to judge what takes "too much time" to play? I'll leave that determination to the Devs.

I'm all for improved AI in CoT that works better than it did in CoH. But I consider that I could succeed in CoH without being dedicated to single minded "[url=http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Scrapperlock]Scrapperlock[/url]" tactics a strength, not a weakness.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Lothic wrote:
I appreciate that these are your opinions on the matter. I simply don't feel they are good enough evidence to change how an entire game works, at least by themselves.

I would agree but they weren't offered by themselves
Lothic wrote:
Who are you (or even I) to judge what takes "too much time" to play? I'll leave that determination to the Devs. I'm all for improved AI in CoT that works better than it did in CoH. But I consider that I could succeed in CoH without being dedicated to single minded "Scrapperlock" tactics a strength, not a weakness.

That's the whole point of bringing the issue up. To discuss it with everyone here, including the devs.
I offered my opinion, and made a request. I could be misreading you but it really seams like you're saying I shouldn't have said anything. If that's the case what's the forum for?

You're asking the Devs to consider a line of reasoning for a fundamental AI behavior. Prove to us why pulling is bad other than it "seems to take too long" to you. That's what the Devs would ask of themselves when considering this issue. If anything I'm simply trying to motivate you to defend your otherwise questionable premise here.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

But it only seems as if you're attacking my proposal, by ignoring my stronger arguments, then pointing out that by themselves the weaker arguments were weak.
Then telling me I shouldn't be trying to force my playstyle on everyone, which I never did.

Problem is your stronger arguments consist of things like "pulling was required because the number of bad guys was just immersion breakingly, implausibly huge" and that removing pulling would "achieve the goal of making teaming more enjoyable" for you.

These are still merely your subjective opinions on the matter.

I can accept you don't like pulling in games (at least the way it worked in CoH). I just don't think you've made a solid case to support your position here. I didn't absolutely love the way pulling/sniping worked in CoH either, but frankly nothing you've said motivates me to "hate" pulling anywhere near as much as you seem to.

Without an overwhelming case for change I can only make the wild assumption that the Devs won't agree there's a need/desire for one amongst the playerbase.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Lothic wrote:
Problem is your stronger arguments consist of things like "pulling was required because the number of bad guys was just immersion breakingly, implausibly huge" and that removing pulling would "achieve the goal of making teaming more enjoyable" for you.
These are still merely your subjective opinions on the matter.
I can accept you don't like pulling in games (at least the way it worked in CoH). I just don't think you've made a solid case to support your position here.

Once again, you insist on ignoring my strongest arguments even after they were pulled out of the original post, repeated, and identified as my strongest arguments, in response to one of your posts.
TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Two things everyone seems to be failing to notice (or ignoring)
1) I did not say we should do away with this practice just because I hate it.
I spelled out a clear argument against it:
"It Shouldn't work. first of all, what kind of bad guy gets hit by a sniper attack and goes off on his own to investigate? Why don't his friends notice? Why do they continue not noticing, as their group keeps getting smaller and smaller until there's only one left?"
2) I'm not opposed to pulling groups.
I'm only opposed to pulling one opponent at a time without the group noticing.
That means you could still pull small groups, as I suggested in the opening post.

God forbid anyone [url=http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Smoke#Smoke]Smokes[/url] the mobs first... *sigh*

There's absolutely no reason why a group of enemies MUST notice when they are getting pulled off one by one. I agree most of the time they OUGHT to notice (and I have no problem with making pulling "harder" to accomplish in CoT in general) but nothing says they MUST notice 100% the time, especially if you can use other powers/tactics in conjunction with pulling that interferes with their long range perceptions.

I don't think every enemy NPC should perform the same way. We can use randomized pull behavior. Sometimes just the hit enemy pulls, sometimes the whole group, sometimes it's that group and some enemies you didn't see.

Keep me guessing and I'll use good strategy and have fun putting together the right response.

I liked that different factions and different mobs had different threat-reaction behaviors. I didn't avoid Vahzilok precisely Because I had learned how to take advantage of their behavior. I look forward to CoT's improved AI and hope that there will be a wide range of behaviors that I can exploit through tactics and strategy.

After all, it was tactics and strategy that let me solo regular content with my Defenders and Controllers. Being 'squishy' meant my Def-trollers could not play like Paladin's Scranker. I could not tank-n-spank. I could not Scrapperlock my way to success.

No, it was all about Preparation, Pulling, and Process. I traded Technique and Time for Survival. And working my way through the process and succeeding in the mission was immensely gratifying. If I could clean out the entire nest of baddies without taking a single hit... Well, it might seem unfair, but I LIKED it!

So, I'm sorry if Paladin is bored with my careful progression and seems to want to disable a popular survival technique, but I need it to survive. I need strategy and tactics and techniques in order to enjoy my game.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Yup, you did want to take down the 'doctors', but a nifty way of doing so, was to pull one zombie out of the crowd beyond aggro-range, then dispatch it. A Vahz Reaper or Mortificator would then run out and try to Rez them. At which point you could massacre him, before he wakes the dead. Double-Pull FTW. *grin*

Once all of the 'doctors' were down, the zombies had zero aggro-sharing and you could defeat them in detail.

Analysis, Strategy, Tactics, Win. Unless you had a team of rabid Scrappers. In which case, you just had to try to keep up and have lots of Awakens on hand.

Be Well!
Fireheart