Announcements

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

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

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

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

Ponderings on Power Set Augments

46 posts / 0 new
Last post
Lost Deep
Lost Deep's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/20/2015 - 17:48
Ponderings on Power Set Augments

Remember this? I do. I really want to hear more about it, because I keep having ideas.

Like... for defensive powersets, could you have a power set augment that gave you a weakness?

Now, obviously, there would be some kind of bonus, but the weakness is too big of a superhero trope to to ignore it. Sandman dislikes water, clayface dislikes ice, venom dislikes fire and sound, the list goes on and on. And I was thinking, how would you get that? How would you customize a powerset to give yourself a weakness?

They've already said how they customize powersets. We just have to let them know that we want to customize powersets to make us more flammable.

...and presumably get some kind of bonus from it? Maybe reduced costs on our toggles or faster cooldown? Ooh, maybe attacks with your weakness gives you more momentum. Nothing quite like pulling out kryptonite to get superman to take a fight seriously. Thoughts?

Under Construction...

Brighellac
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 3 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/17/2015 - 00:24
I actually like this a lot.

I actually like this a lot. Maybe a defensive power augment that doubles your defenses but drops your defense to psionic by 66%. Maybe an offensive augment that can't affect ice armor

Greyhawk
Greyhawk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/03/2015 - 19:17
Hmm...interesting idea, but I

Hmm...interesting idea, but I think you might be looking at it in reverse.

So I've got this attack skill that I've had since level 1. It recharges pretty quick and doesn't consume much endurance, so it gets used multiple times in every fight. I've maxed out four Augment slots and all four contain Damage Augments. I've got two Refinements one on each of the first two Augments. Both Refinements are Poison because I just love DoT supplements.

But what's this?

There's a special Power Pack on sale in the store. It's 20% off this week only. It has four Damage/Poison Augments and two Accuracy Refinements! Sweet! But it also has a downside. For each piece in the set I slot I lose 5% resistance to Fire that applies after all of my Defense powers/buffs and the associated augments for a total 30% loss in my resistance to fire that cannot be compensated for. So yeah, I can slot this Power Pack and take down every Rook boss in the game without breaking a sweat, but the first IFRIT minion I come across is gonna use me for a floor mop without even thinking about it.

I'd expect this kind of induced weakness rather than a "weakness" Refinement, but we'll see.

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

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
The concept of "suffering

The concept of "suffering from a weakness that's counterbalanced by some kind of benefit" has been brought up several times in the past. I would agree that having a character weakness is a standard superhero trope and several of the classic superhero PnP games (like Champions) handle weaknesses fairly well. The problem comes when you try to apply that concept to a MMO game.

It turns out the typical MMO player absolutely hates anything that would impose any kind of weakness on their characters. Even when having weaknesses might make sense in a superhero game most people will do anything and everything they can to make those weaknesses meaningless. The main problem is that there's no human oversight as to what the players do in a MMO. In a PnP game the human GM can make sure that if Captain Fantastic has given himself a major weakness to the smell of freshly cut grass that Captain Fantastic will not be able to avoid that very easily. The clever human GM would always make sure Captain Fantastic would have to go to parks or sports fields where the grass is often mowed. In a MMO a player could likely always avoid something weird like freshly cut grass and thus render his so-called "weakness" insignificant.

We only need to review the history of CoH itself to see how well having a "character weakness" was accepted by the playerbase. When Kheldians were first released they had a serious built-in weakness to negative energy and the game constantly made sure they would have to face negative energy attacks (from Quants/Voids). That went over like a lead balloon. People screamed and cried that it was "too hard and/or unfair" and it didn't take too long before the Devs of CoH nerfed back the effects of that weakness to the point where it was almost non-existent. Basically CoH already tried to give people a "superhero-styled" weakness and it failed miserably.

Simply put I don't believe a system of "weaknesses" like this would really work in a MMO setting. People would just min/max the thing to the extreme so that they got the most of the benefit while suffering the least of the weakness. The following illustrates this point perfectly:

Brighellac wrote:

I actually like this a lot. Maybe a defensive power augment that doubles your defenses but drops your defense to psionic by 66%.

Brighellac could simply avoid psionic attacks (which tend to be relatively rare anyway) and get far more benefit from the general DEF boost and almost no disadvantage from the supposed weakness.

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

oOStaticOo
oOStaticOo's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 11 months ago
Joined: 10/24/2013 - 06:21
If there are going to be any

If there are going to be any "Weaknesses" in the game, I believe they should and possibly will be implemented into the Powers themselves. Much like Fire had a weakness to Ice and Ice to Fire from CoH. As Lothic has pointed out, there are plenty of threads in which things like this are discussed. Ultimately something like this makes a min/maxers dreams come true. One will simply create the strongest character one can achieve and avoid all the things that make that character look like a piece of flash paper in a forest fire.

I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!

Brighellac
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 3 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/17/2015 - 00:24
Tarnation, Lothic! You're

Tarnation, Lothic! You're circumventin' my minmaxing plan!

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

Tarnation, Lothic! You're circumventin' my minmaxing plan!

Well for what it's worth I wasn't intending to single you out with this. I think it's safe to say virtually everyone (including yours truly) would min/max this thing to the hilt if it was part of the game. That fact in and of itself shows why it probably SHOULDN'T be part of the game.

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

Brighellac
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 3 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/17/2015 - 00:24
No worries. I was just

No worries. I was just trying to come up with a valid example of how a weakness could be entered into a toon build. There will likely be as many just for fun players as minmaxing degenerate players. If weaknesses are introduced with significant enough benefits, both will use them.

In fact if there is an AE equivalent, don't be surprised by farming builds set up to dominate a particular mission.

I remember the no travel power farming builds. Icky if effective

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

No worries. I was just trying to come up with a valid example of how a weakness could be entered into a toon build. There will likely be as many just for fun players as minmaxing degenerate players. If weaknesses are introduced with significant enough benefits, both will use them.
In fact if there is an AE equivalent, don't be surprised by farming builds set up to dominate a particular mission.
I remember the no travel power farming builds. Icky if effective

It's mostly just a question of whether such a system for character weaknesses could ever be devised for a MMO where the weaknesses actually play a significant role or at the very least can't be marginalized so they never hurt the player in any serious way.

I'm not suggesting if you decide to have a character whose weakness is aluminum that CoT must force you to fight aluminum based robots in every single mission. I'm just suggesting there should be a way to make sure you can't figure out how to always avoid those aluminum based robots 100% of the time either. Any character weakness has to be a REAL disadvantage at least a part of the time in order to justify any counterbalancing benefit for it.

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

Brighellac
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 3 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/17/2015 - 00:24
I don't have as deep felt

I don't have as deep felt feelings on the matter as you do, lothic. I min/maxed my builds in coh in order to do the range of things I wanted to do as well as possible. That said, both my farming toons had ss, sj, and taunt because I liked doing task forces, zone events, and raids.

If I had a weakness to optimize farming a specific map, I'd still do the CoT versions of those three things. The only adjustment to my mosh selection is to not take radio or streetsweeper mishes against enemy groups specializing in my weakness.

whiteperegrine
whiteperegrine's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 14:49
...not to derail...buuut...

...not to derail...buuut....min/maxing: isn't that basically gonna happen whether there were weaknesses/vulnerabilities or not? the answer....wait for it.......wait fooor it..... yes! :p

in general, I like the various ideas for weaknesses/vulnerabilities. I would assume though that the problem comes in balancing the game around those very things. given players are players...min/maxing is gonna occur. so, does one balance a game around making the assumption that this phenomenon will occur....OR....do you balance the game around the assumption that players will have some modicum of self control and create balanced characters?

it becomes to much of a nightmare...you go one way and the people will complain that the game is to hard...you go the other and the people will complain it's to easy... yeah, I would rather not deal with that headache, as a dev. not to mention, it's one less thing that you have to wrack the brain pans about in getting it to work in the game...you already have a ton of stuff to deal with.

Lost Deep
Lost Deep's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/20/2015 - 17:48
The angle of minmaxing is a

The angle of minmaxing is a true one, but that's going to happen any which way. The best way to counteract that might be that the weakness and resulting boost isn't that large, but we don't know how much of an effect power set augments are going to have. They might be fairly small things, as far as we know. Cost and bonus might be a theme, for all we know: converting slashing damage to psionic would make you less effective against things resistant to psionic. This might have been a premature topic, all said and done, considering how little we have to go on.

Under Construction...

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

given players are players...min/maxing is gonna occur. so, does one balance a game around making the assumption that this phenomenon will occur....OR....do you balance the game around the assumption that players will have some modicum of self control and create balanced characters?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!!

Ever heard the term Aiding and Abetting before? I'll let you guess how much of it is considered "acceptable" in a gaming context when it's done by the Developers in support of min/max inclinations by the Players.

Really? Some modicum of self control and create balanced characters?

Granted, it can happen even when a system is unbalanced, because some people are honorable enough to exercise Good Taste.

But as a baseline assumption that this will be default "NORM" and the universally accepted conventional wisdom?

I've got some "beachfront property" to sell you ... on the planet VENUS ...

Look, as difficult as it is to accept ... Players, as a group, have a very strong tendency towards the old folk saying of "give an inch, take a yard" when it comes to this subject. And if you've got anything even close to being close to PvP, you can multiply that by the formula of Xx ... as in X raised to the power of x ... and see how far assuming people are going to pick "low numbers" in a system that rewards use of "high numbers" will get you.

C'mon, whiteperegrine ... there's naivete ... and then there's just plain You Have No Idea What You're Up Against with a heaping helping of no desire to know.

Weaknesses and Vulnerabilities "work" when you've got Story Control and you're trying to make a drama. It works in comic books, because the only things that happen occur because the Writers and Editors sign off on it, thus keeping everything in their lane. Same deal with novels and movies and television ... none of which are interactive experiences, so all the decision making happens ahead of time.

Weaknesses and Vulnerabilities can also "work" in single player games that follow a Directed Story Path defining the railroad on which everything takes place. Again, there is limited freedom for any Player to go outside their lane.

Weaknesses and Vulnerabilities can also "work" in a tabletop pen and paper RPG campaign (presumably played with friends) because there's someone there who is refereeing what happens and why. The Game Master can ENSURE that the weaknesses and vulnerabilities can actually come into play in a way that can't be totally exploited via rules raping.

Game Developers shouldn't be in the business of Aiding and Abetting the systematic (and industrial strength?) rules raping of any game system they offer.

In an MMORPG, the structure of how the game works can be attacked by the pursuit of min/max. Why would you want to Aid and Abet that effort by building the tools you need to min/max directly into the structure of the game and then DARE Players NOT TO USE IT??

Clue sent.
Awaiting reply.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Felix
Felix's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 4 months ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/04/2013 - 20:45
I sure hope there will be min

I sure hope there will be min maxing and optimization, we are trying to build a system that rewards it, but not ridiculously so. There will hopefully be no magic numbers, like 45% defense. Trade-offs will be built into the system.

Know thy users, for they are not you.
"Preliminary optimization is the root of all evil." -Knuth
Coding Lead
a.k.a. Mr Sigma, Mr. Stochastic, Balancing Act, The Oncoming Storm

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 15 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Oh don't get me wrong, Felix

Oh don't get me wrong, Felix ... I sincerely believe in the "power" of min/max and definitely am one of those Players who seeks optimization.

Knowledge is Power.
Power corrupts.
Study hard. Be EBIL.

I just consider it to be Lousy Design when the route to min/max is either too easy, or worse, too obvious. Systems which DON'T allow you to "have it all" at the same time (ie. Tank Mages) have superior gameplay over those which do. As a reformed Rules Lawyer myself, I've been known to do pro bono work on occasion ... hence why I tend to have certain sensitivities to certain ideas that may work perfectly fine in one medium (comic books, et al.) but which completely implode with messy warhead yields in others (MMORPGs).


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
To be clear I'm not actually

To be clear I'm not actually against the idea of min/maxing. Obviously it's going to occur regardless of what the Devs do and I'm not against the "weakness" idea specifically because I think that if it doesn't happen the whole idea of min/maxing would be avoided or solved in any way.

But as Redlynne said just because I'm not strictly against min/maxing doesn't mean that I think the Devs should include things in the game that unavoidably ENCOURAGES it. She sums it up perfectly with this statement:

Redlynne wrote:

I just consider it to be Lousy Design when the route to min/max is either too easy, or worse, too obvious.

Min/maxing is not an MMO evil that needs to be eliminated. But by the same token it's not something that needs to be catered to or allowed to be practically mandatory. If this game includes some kind of optional "pick a weakness to get a buff" system it'll be almost guaranteed everyone will opt for it and everyone will work it to their maximum benefit regardless of character concept. Min/Maxing should be allowed, not required.

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

oOStaticOo
oOStaticOo's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 11 months ago
Joined: 10/24/2013 - 06:21
Obviously some form of Min

Obviously some form of Min/Maxing will be in the game. Rightfully so. It helps with money sinks in the game. I can't tell you how many times I thought I had a character "Perfected" in CoH, only to go back into Mids and tinker around with it some more to find out I didn't and then go back into the game to spend MORE money to Re-Perfect it! The Devs do want some form of Min/Maxing involved in the game. They just don't want so much of it that it becomes too easy for people to abuse the system. In a PvE only game, it might not be horrendously bad, but in a game that involves PvP it will be broken.

I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!

syntaxerror37
syntaxerror37's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 08/24/2013 - 11:01
I'm in the camp that adding

I'm in the camp that adding the trade off weakness for buffs is overall not a good idea in an MMO setting.

Beyond that, however, I think it is important to define what a weakness is. No defense/resistance to a given attack is not the same as a weakness.". Take the Invulnerability power set. It had no native defense or resistance to psychic damage, but the player did not take extra damage from a psychic attack. Hit a clockwork with a psycihc attack though and extra damage was done, that is a weakness.

-----------------------------------------
I never set anything on fire accidentally!

The Titan Legacy - Defender of the Inner Flame

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 13 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
It is possible to create a

It is possible to create a system of drawbacks and advantages, even for an MMO. However, the system must be designed with the drawbacks and advantages from the outset to work properly. Depending on the nature of the game, the number of drawbacks and advantages would either need to be kept relatively few (within the context of the rest of character design) or integral throughout character design. The more indepth and complex the game system, the exponential increase to the complexity of implementing drawbacks and advantages becomes. Each possible combination of character design needs to be viable in some form within the context of the game.

Even then, I would say its a safe bet that as time goes on those drawbacks and advantages would be changed in either their costing / reward (if there is a cost / reward schema), the effect on the character, or both. Because players will find those optimal combinations devs did not foresee (or could not foresee) resulting in game play advantages that makes those combinations peform beyond the bounds of expected performance or players unintentionally gimping themselves and adjustments are needed to make those combinations more viable.

That said, we certainly expect min / maxing to occur. The system is intended to expect such behavior to occur (as Felix said). While I wouldn't rule out the possibility of drawback / advantage Set Augments, I would say it is a very low hanging fruit that would require a lot of cutting away at shrubbery and vines to get to and even then, it may not be very sweet.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
whiteperegrine
whiteperegrine's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 14:49
Redlynne wrote:
Redlynne wrote:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!!
....
Clue sent.
Awaiting reply.

good to see you got a good laugh outta my lil post. :) although I think you may have missed the point behind it. heh

In general the post itself was not really advocating min/maxing, nor was it saying its a waste of time. it does state that players will min/max, I even state as much in the quote you posted of my original post. The point behind the post was actually regarding the status of min/maxing and possible pitfalls on the side of the devs if they opted to implement some sort of system that had weaknesses/vulnerabilities.

Make no mistake I am hardly so naïve as to believe that the player base will not min/max if such a system was in place...hell, I would do it on a few characters myself, if not all depending on the exact numbers. No, the majority of the player base would NOT employ any level of modicum and they would be off to the races on how best to abuse the system for maximum benefit with as little harm to their character as possible.

in regards to weakness/vulnerabilities working in an MMO...I personally think it could be done, but again as I mentioned in my original post...it would be a nightmare to implement not to mention the massive amount of time required to balance it throughout the game. yeah...as a dev, I would definitely put that one on hold, if not an outright PASS. The exception being if it was something I wanted to purposely tackle, given there is no MMO out there that features such a thing and it could actually be a selling point.

now...about that beachfront property..... :p

reply sent.

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

in regards to weakness/vulnerabilities working in an MMO...I personally think it could be done, but again as I mentioned in my original post...it would be a nightmare to implement not to mention the massive amount of time required to balance it throughout the game.

I'll see your "nightmare" and raise you a "development hell" ...

Just about the ONLY way I could ever see such a system working is if you "lock" the game after its release and never do anything to it ever again. Essentially, treat the game like a DVD console release which is never supposed to get patched up for any reason ever.

I'm talking about a game that has to be intentionally designed to be STATIC and UNCHANGING in terms of what's in it.

Why?

Because the "balance point" for Choose Your Own Weakness/Vulnerability is just way too damn sensitive to any kinds of future developments (kind of like PvP, actually) where just about anything at all that's new that gets released can knock everything wildly off kilter and "there goes the ballgame" for keeping the game fun and balanced.

Note that this is essentially the same problem that Magic the Gathering has with card decks. They have to keep obsoleting previous runs of cards because if you allowed everything that ever got printed to be allowed into official play you'd have the most incredibly BROKEN card game ever. And even as is, there is almost always an unforeseen combination possible between New cards and the Last Series of cards that can just be unbelievably broken. There's a reason why some of the cards for Magic the Gathering (or as we like to call it, Tragic the Spending, also known as Cardboard Crack) had to be BANNED after they got used in tournament play.

In a MMORPG that is evolving over time with continuous development, setting yourself up to have to dance on the head of a pin like that is NOT a good idea for how to keep a game from spinning wildly out of control. Better to have a more ... robust ... region of space within which the game's balance can be defined, rather than trying to keep everything inside the point of a singularity.

But then, you knew that already, didn't you? ^_~


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Greyhawk
Greyhawk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/03/2015 - 19:17
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

It is possible to create a system of drawbacks and advantages, even for an MMO. However, the system must be designed with the drawbacks and advantages from the outset to work properly. Depending on the nature of the game, the number of drawbacks and advantages would either need to be kept relatively few (within the context of the rest of character design) or integral throughout character design. The more indepth and complex the game system, the exponential increase to the complexity of implementing drawbacks and advantages becomes. Each possible combination of character design needs to be viable in some form within the context of the game.
Even then, I would say its a safe bet that as time goes on those drawbacks and advantages would be changed in either their costing / reward (if there is a cost / reward schema), the effect on the character, or both. Because players will find those optimal combinations devs did not foresee (or could not foresee) resulting in game play advantages that makes those combinations peform beyond the bounds of expected performance or players unintentionally gimping themselves and adjustments are needed to make those combinations more viable.
That said, we certainly expect min / maxing to occur. The system is intended to expect such behavior to occur (as Felix said). While I wouldn't rule out the possibility of drawback / advantage Set Augments, I would say it is a very low hanging fruit that would require a lot of cutting away at shrubbery and vines to get to and even then, it may not be very sweet.

I don't mind drawbacks. When done well, I rather like them. They add another level of strategic planning and tactical awareness.

However, I really hate it when my character has a built in weakness and suddenly the only missions I can get are for enemies specifically created to attack that weakness. Once in awhile is fine, but every single mission is just too much. Even every third mission would be a struggle.

The whole point of having a weakness is to allow me as a player to plan strategies that compensate for that weakness, not to give the game AI an easy way to defeat me.

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

Brighellac
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 3 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/17/2015 - 00:24
Bit of an apples and oranges

Bit of an apples and oranges argument. And yes, I played mtg ... A lot

oOStaticOo
oOStaticOo's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 11 months ago
Joined: 10/24/2013 - 06:21
I still stand by what I said

I still stand by what I said earlier. If there are going to be drawbacks then they need to be hard baked into the powers themselves from the get go. Much like Fire and Ice from CoH. They should be a nuisance, but also something that won't be so broken it can be taken advantage of. When we start adding drawbacks to things we can add into the powers, such as Augments or Refinements, I seriously feel there can be a misuse of power that will lead to broken game play.

I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!

whiteperegrine
whiteperegrine's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 14:49
would having a working system

would having a working system of weakness/vulnerabilities be a nightmare...or a dev hell? six half dozen of the other....it would be a major under taking and would require a very tight reign over all aspects of the game as it grew, there is absolutely no doubt of that. yet still, it could be done, just depends on how ambitious and dedicated the dev team is. if a game came out with it as a feature, I would check it out as I like the idea behind em....whether it turned out good or bad I would check it out at the very least.

MTG...yeah, I know a good bit about it as I used to sell that cardboard cr....errr....game to a good number of customers and held tournies in the shop pretty regularly. as far as the comparison, sure I can see where you would get that, but by appearance it looks like your assuming the very worst to occur. not a bad thing, hope for the best plan for the worst and all that jazz. I personally think that there would be issues with it upon its first release...but given time this new feature would be improved upon...either by the starting dev team...or by others who learn from the first mistakes. after all, it is rare that things work 'perfectly' straight out the gate. ;)

as far as having them in CoT, I am not a fan of the idea...and to be brutally honest, part of the reason being we are working with a volunteer dev team. as such, I would rather keep them focus'd on game play similar to CoH, which I would assume is a big enough headache (not to mention getting the game to live up to the hype we as forum goers are putting upon them), no reason to add another mountain onto the one they already have in front of them.

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Greyhawk]<p>I don't mind
Greyhawk wrote:

I don't mind drawbacks. When done well, I rather like them. They add another level of strategic planning and tactical awareness.
However, I really hate it when my character has a built in weakness and suddenly the only missions I can get are for enemies specifically created to attack that weakness. Once in awhile is fine, but every single mission is just too much. Even every third mission would be a struggle.

This highlights the main complaint I think most people had with the way the CoH Devs handled the original negative energy weakness of the Kheldians. In an attempt to make sure that the weakness actually played a significant role the Devs went a little overboard and tossed in Quants and Voids that could show up in ANY mission. If you didn't play smartly Kheld players could easily get excessively smacked by this which obviously was less fun than intended.

Greyhawk wrote:

The whole point of having a weakness is to allow me as a player to plan strategies that compensate for that weakness, not to give the game AI an easy way to defeat me.

Your mention of AI is again the key point here. In a PnP RPG game controlled by a human GM it's usually pretty easy for that human to regulate exactly how much or how little a player's weakness impacts the overall play session. The human GM can essentially choose "on-the-fly" how often that weakness will be exploited by the NPCs and make it a significant roleplaying factor without making it overly annoying or handicapping.

A MMO based on whatever procedural or decision making "AI" it uses simply can't be as flexible when it comes to knowing just how much to push the weakness button. The situation then boils down to something the player can often "plan strategies that compensate for the weakness" instead of something the player is at least to some degree at the mercy of.

Because it becomes something the player has almost complete control over in a MMO it becomes very problematic when the player can also choose exactly what his/her weakness will be in the first place. When the player can choose the weakness and can choose how to mitigate it at the same time the net outcome can be getting potential benefits for little to no risk.

Frankly I'm not sure MMOs are quite ready for the task of being able to properly judge when to exploit PC weaknesses in a way that's both effective and non-excessive.

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

Comicsluvr
Comicsluvr's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/07/2013 - 03:39
Redlynne wrote:
Redlynne wrote:

Knowledge is Power.
Power corrupts.
Study hard. Be EBIL.
I just consider it to be Lousy Design when the route to min/max is either too easy, or worse, too obvious. Systems which DON'T allow you to "have it all" at the same time (ie. Tank Mages) have superior gameplay over those which do.

I heard the Tankmage argument for YEARS in CoX as the excuse of why Scrappers hade limited to no ranged attacks and Blasters were often made of glass. Then the Redside came out with the Widow and Spider classes. Now you had characters who could do it all depending on what you chose. I had several of each of these and they were all a blast to play. Melee attacks, ranged attacks, Status Defense...the whole works and I never ONCE heard anyone shout that they broke the game even when they launched Rogue and you could make them on Blueside.

The whole Tankmage thing is an empty fear that doesn't exist as long as the game is designed well enough. It's simple...don't allow any class that can do everything to do it as WELL as a special-purpose class. The Tank should ALWAYS be the toughest guy on the table...but not do top damage. The Blaster or Scrapper should ALWAYS be top damage output (ranged and melee respectively). This doesn't mean that one class can't trod in another classes' sandbox but they should be less effective when outside their specialty.

For those of us who LIKE the idea of 'I can do it all but not as well as others' then what's the problem? Yes, I can take damage...but the Tank does it better when he's around. Yes, I can lay down damage...but the Blaster or Scrapper does it better. Maybe it's the fact that I solo a lot but even so...

The Magic Triad is dead...there is no need to fear the Tankmage.

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

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 15 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Problem is that the Tankmage

Problem is that the Tankmage is what Players strive for ... and thus is something of a Brain Eating Zombie. Even if you can't make a Tankmage right now, the Developers always need to be aware of the potential for Tankmages to emerge from evolving gameplay developments. Thus, even if the Tankmage is "dead" ... given the right incantation they can arise from their grave and devour us all ... if the Developers aren't careful.

Hence the border guarding and the warnings about fertilizing the soil from which Tankmages can emerge, because once they do it's a Zombie Apocalypse event to force them back underground.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Felix
Felix's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 4 months ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/04/2013 - 20:45
However, lots of folks were

However, lots of folks were unhappy with Tankers when Brutes came blue side.

Just my $0.02

Know thy users, for they are not you.
"Preliminary optimization is the root of all evil." -Knuth
Coding Lead
a.k.a. Mr Sigma, Mr. Stochastic, Balancing Act, The Oncoming Storm

HornetsNest
HornetsNest's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 10 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 02/05/2015 - 11:11
Felix wrote:
Felix wrote:

However, lots of folks were unhappy with Tankers when Brutes came blue side.
Just my $0.02

I didn't notice that on Virtue. Even during the "sunset" period just about every team I joined was looking for a tank. Brutes were wonderful for damage, and considered better than Scrappers by many, But Tankers were always in demand

Lay your hands on me
While I'm bleeding dry
Break on through blue skies
And take it high

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 13 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
If you go by the old forums,

If you go by the old forums, Felix's statement is accurate. Its also why there were a couple of very large threads dedicated to addressing the disparity between the two which eventually revolved around creating a new inherent ability for Tankers or altering its existing inherent; Guantlet. I had several lengthy discussions with the powers dev about how their view of the situation and possible routes toward a resolving the disparity.

The core elements of those discussions were always in the back of my mind when we were designing the classification Masteries for this game.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Izzy
Izzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/09/2013 - 11:09
Felix wrote:
Felix wrote:

However, lots of folks were unhappy with Tankers when Brutes came blue side.
Just my $0.02

That was only in the Late Game, when IO Sets made a Brute on par with a Standard IO'ed tank, for defense.

Even a select Few Scrapper builds came CLOSE to what a Brute could do, but it was a few straws short, so Scrappers never could take up the Tank role reliably.

Brand X
Brand X's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/01/2013 - 00:26
Wasn't it proven that a few

Wasn't it proven that a few sets did better as Tanker sets/combos than Brute? I believe it was a few combos.

whiteperegrine
whiteperegrine's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 14:49
I miss Citenik, my brute. :(

I miss Citenik, my brute. :( when they made it possible to jump sides...he did it faster than a fat kid through a twinkie...

Comicsluvr
Comicsluvr's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/07/2013 - 03:39
Oh I understand and agree

Oh I understand and agree completely which is why I said that the system needs to be tight enough to prohibit this.

I'm not a programmer so to me this seems to be a lot easier than it probably is but this is how I see it:

1) Tanker has max Defense of X and max Resistance of Y.

2) Blaster has max damage of Z, mad Defense of 1/2 X and max Resistance of 1/2 T.

3) Scrapper has a max damage of 0.8 Z, defense of 0.8 X and Resistance of 0.8 Y

All of these numbers include any and all bonuses due to Enhancements, Crafting and so forth. Buffs do NOT count towards this limit as they must come from another character and everyone in the area receives the buff.

I'm sure it's more complex than this but I see little trouble having a hard limit set to insure that everyone has their 'thing' that they do better than everyone else.

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

Empyrean
Empyrean's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/16/2014 - 07:51
I was one of the few that

I was one of the few that kept on scrankin, but my main was FA/EM/PM, so, you know, burst plus steady AOE and some range.

With a good build and enhancements I wasn't too far behind most brutes. And pulled aggro right the hell off of them with AOE + Gauntlet. And I was't too far behind most of the dedicated tanks in toughness.

Did try a FA/EM Brute and while it was just ludicrous, gratuitous, silly damage, it was too squishy for me without those HP and higher base numbers. Basically felt more like a Scrapper. Better kill them first or you're in trouble.

Course, I soloed a lot. Lead tanked probably at least once every other week and did fine, but I guess all those HP didn't matter as much with someone constantly shoving health up your hiney.

Brute might have survived just as well and have done more damage on a team--except Gauntlet really did make a difference in protecting your teammates. If someone got in trouble I could just throw a fireball and all the mobs around them turned right towards me.

That was well worth the lower damage when protecting my team.

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

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

2) Blaster has max damage of Z, mad Defense of 1/2 X and max Resistance of 1/2 T.

So, since only the blaster has any Mad Defense, they're the best choice to go up against the Minions of Yog-Suthoth?

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

Lin Chiao Feng
Lin Chiao Feng's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 13 hours ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/02/2013 - 09:27
Felix wrote:
Felix wrote:

However, lots of folks were unhappy with Tankers when Brutes came blue side.
Just my $0.02

Not when it came to Hamidon raids. Tankers were way superior for those. Before we could cross sides, we had to drop regen nukes or similar on all the brutes before each phase of a Hami raid. Made it a lot harder.

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

Empyrean
Empyrean's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/16/2014 - 07:51
Comicsluvr wrote:
Comicsluvr wrote:

I heard the Tankmage argument for YEARS in CoX as the excuse of why Scrappers hade limited to no ranged attacks and Blasters were often made of glass. Then the Redside came out with the Widow and Spider classes. Now you had characters who could do it all depending on what you chose. I had several of each of these and they were all a blast to play. Melee attacks, ranged attacks, Status Defense...the whole works and I never ONCE heard anyone shout that they broke the game even when they launched Rogue and you could make them on Blueside.
The whole Tankmage thing is an empty fear that doesn't exist as long as the game is designed well enough. It's simple...don't allow any class that can do everything to do it as WELL as a special-purpose class. The Tank should ALWAYS be the toughest guy on the table...but not do top damage. The Blaster or Scrapper should ALWAYS be top damage output (ranged and melee respectively). This doesn't mean that one class can't trod in another classes' sandbox but they should be less effective when outside their specialty.
For those of us who LIKE the idea of 'I can do it all but not as well as others' then what's the problem? Yes, I can take damage...but the Tank does it better when he's around. Yes, I can lay down damage...but the Blaster or Scrapper does it better. Maybe it's the fact that I solo a lot but even so...
The Magic Triad is dead...there is no need to fear the Tankmage.

Big +1

The main I reference in my earlier post was a quite intentionally a Tankmage, but, while he felt OP in the great way all CoH characters did to give you that Superhero power trip, he was balanced.

He was tough as nails, but dedicated tanks just seemed truly invulnerable compared to him and I occasionally had to run while they laughed at the damage.

He could do an opening salvo of impressive Melee and AOE and even decent Ranged burst damage (two types of buildup), but once he shot his wad it was back down to tank-level damage and it was a while before he could do it again, so he couldn't sustain it like a Blaster, Brute, or Scrapper.

He could do some sustained AOE, but it was minor and so helped less the higher ranked the mob was (though it was great for keeping aggro).

And of course he had a little Disorient from EM, and that did help a lot, but it wasn't major control.

Sooo... he was a jack of many (not all) trades, but sufficiently "second best" at them that while he felt OP to play in a good way, he wasn't out of balance at all.

BUT! He played PRECISELY the way I wanted him to. I was able to dial in the exact survivability vs damage ratio with the exact play-feel that I wanted for me to have an absolute ball playing--and THAT'S what I miss when I play other games.

You could just sculpt personal playstyle like nobody's business in CoH. Especially when you also take into account trays and macros keybindings.

There were people who THOUGHT they had hacked the system. I remember being on a team with this defense-softcapped blaster who kept talking about how she had broken the system and noone could keep up with her. She would frequently break off and take out whole groups on her own.

But she was so mouthy that I kept an eye on her health bar, and every other group she hit it went deep in the red and about half the time it went red she face planted, but she would quickly and quietly used a wakie and slip back into the group like nothing had happened.

Now, I knew my limitations well, and I probably could have taken out all of the groups she did without dying once--but it would have taken me a LOT longer. Her damage was nuts.

I felt overall versatility AND balance were good. How they pulled that off I have no idea.

You know... having written that wall of text :P, it occurs to me that may have been a significant part of CoH's success in the Superhero genre.

Superheroes SHOULD feel OP, and by letting people focus on what makes them feel powerful while also letting them do a little of everything else, EVERYONE feels like they "hacked the system" even if it's balanced.

For me it was toughness, burst damage, and damage versatility that made me feel powerful, but I had a blaster buddy who didn't care how much he died, just how fast he killed. And he killed fast.

He shook his head at my pitiful damage while I chuckled every time he died. We both felt OP, but in context to the game neither of us truly were.

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

Interdictor
Interdictor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:26
Felix wrote:
Felix wrote:

However, lots of folks were unhappy with Tankers when Brutes came blue side.
Just my $0.02

Yes, but in response the tanks got a couple of buffs in the last few issues; Bruising (which was a great solo AND team ability) and even more Hit Points (10% bump IIRC).

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 13 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Interdictor wrote:
Interdictor wrote:

Felix wrote:
However, lots of folks were unhappy with Tankers when Brutes came blue side.
Just my $0.02

Yes, but in response the tanks got a couple of buffs in the last few issues; Bruising (which was a great solo AND team ability) and even more Hit Points (10% bump IIRC).

Brushing was done due to low to mid-level performance issues. Due to the way the powers were set up with AT modifiers, tankers did less damage for the same endurance cost and it was found at the lower levels prior to adequate slotting, tankers not only took longer to defeat a spawn to other melee ATs, but they also used up too much endurance to do so. Bruising was given as a means to provide some additional damage for a tanker without increasing the AT mod.

The hp total increase wasn't really a factor outside of a very few circumstances where it made a noticeable difference.

Outside of a few particular situations in the game (hami raid, a few incarnate trials, and a TF or 2) there was very little difference that a tanker actually provided for the team that a Brute could not be set up or supported to provde.

None of the changes done altered this disparity. The fact that Tankers aggro a few more mobs easier than a Brute was rapidly becoming a neglible advantage in comparison to performance metrics for a good majority of the game. It was why Tankers were still being eyed for changes. Though if I recall correctly there was no time frame given other than post i24 (which would see a lot of other changes coming to other ATs or rather their powes and a few new power sets). These details are based off posts made by the old devs in several long threads and from pms I had with a.hawk at the time.

Topics like this and other related issues are partly the reason we have designed the Classification Mastery powers the way we have.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
HornetsNest
HornetsNest's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 10 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 02/05/2015 - 11:11
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

If you go by the old forums, Felix's statement is accurate. Its also why there were a couple of very large threads dedicated to addressing the disparity between the two which eventually revolved around creating a new inherent ability for Tankers or altering its existing inherent; Guantlet. I had several lengthy discussions with the powers dev about how their view of the situation and possible routes toward a resolving the disparity.
The core elements of those discussions were always in the back of my mind when we were designing the classification Masteries for this game.

I can only go by my personal experiences, and every time I logged in with a Tanker there were 2 or 3 immediate group invites. No Tank-phobics at all

Lay your hands on me
While I'm bleeding dry
Break on through blue skies
And take it high

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 13 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
I'm not disputing your

I'm not disputing your experience at all. What I am talking about is what was determined to be true that functionally what Tankers were supposed to provide - that is their one functional role of team protection via aggro control was significantly encroached upon by the presence of Brutes in a majority of the game. There were but a very few, very specific set of circumstances where a Tanker's extreme sustainability were of true value for encounters.

Devs knew there were disparity issues. And at one time considered reducing a Brute sustainability further to which there was a huge outcry. Any other changes needed to be done on the Tanker's end of things and it needed to be done in a way that improved function of their role. Which is why their inherent ability (or abilities if you consider Bruising a second inherent ) was being eyed for future changes.

This wasn't the only disparity between ATs in the game either, but one of the ones that had been specifically noted by the powers dev at the time as a known issue. The disparity wasn't considered significant enough to warrant it e away from other changes coming to the game as i24 was bing worked on when this cam about, and later it was in beta so time scheduling was rather full. Tankers still functioned and weren't horribly broken, it was just that their role was being encroached upon.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
cybermitheral
cybermitheral's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 5 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/21/2013 - 20:54
In CoH I had a LOT of Tanks

In CoH I had a LOT of Tanks and Brutes both before and after the alignment system.
I 'Main Tanked' most of my groups Strike Forces/Task Forces/Trials and once I could make a Blue Brute it was rare to need a Tank unless we were aiming at an ITF +4/x8 or something similar.

The IO'd Brute could be just as or nearly as survivable as a Tank (depending on the difficulty) but with a much higher damage output. It wasn't just -10 Survivability/+10% Dam it was more like -10% Surv/+40% Dam (numbers are not exact just used as an example). So yes my Tanks were tougher but like having a monitor that refreshes at 500 FPS I didn't see any difference between my Tank vs Brute survival (again to be clear as long as the mission wasn't set to the highest difficulty).

That was part of the problem. A Brute (mainly with IO Sets) could Tank sufficiently while still doing high damage. A Tank (with IO Sets) could Tank but almost never provide significant damage let alone almost-Brute levels of damage.

I loved my Tanks. As a "survivalist" player almost all my characters tried to get close to max def/res - made it difficult for me to get my head around Controllers :) Im sure I gimped a few toons trying to make them survivable instead of focusing on their main strengths :)

The Phoenix Rising Initiative Rules Lawyer

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 13 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
The problem isn't so much

The problem isn't so much that a Brute "could tank". Nor that it was "IO'd" to do so. Practically any AT could "tank" when fully IO'd, though some required more effort or unique tactics to "tank". It was more of an issue with the general content at general builds where Brutes easily assumed the role with Tank's increased sustainability being unnecessary for the content. The only real difference was that Tanks could hit the aggro cap easier than Brutes could, both could grab 10 via taunt-auras, Tanks had 5 target small aoe ranged taunt to Brute's single target, and Tankers had gauntlet of up to 5 targets off their melee attack to brutes 1. Due to the speed brutes could easily attain taking out minions the difference in aggro-grabbing of typically 5 total targets (17 being the immediate cap) didn't equate to a noticeable difference. And in the grand scheme of things even this was't the problem if Tanks had something else to offer to their team like Brutes did (and more damage wasn't the answer for tanks), but Tanks didn't except for their higher sustainability. Which as already stated, was only necessary for very few specific set of circumstances.

The goal,of our Mastery powers is to provide a distinct feel to the play style of a given classification. We expect that there will be "crossed lines" of the roles. It's the nature of the game play we intend to create after all where no class is absolutely necessary for all content but every class can still bring something unique to the table.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
cybermitheral
cybermitheral's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 5 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/21/2013 - 20:54
The Mastery system makes me

The Mastery system makes me giddy with delight. Options/customisations/min-max/...
HELL YES!!!

The Phoenix Rising Initiative Rules Lawyer