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.
For the record, I would be against anything like a "you need a teammate to do this" mission as part of an otherwise soloable arc from a contact. CoX tried that. It sucked. Even people who liked teaming could never find anyone, and even when you could find someone who had one of those missions to do and would ostensibly want to team up, they might have had DIFFERENT missions to have to do, and as such you couldn't agree on whose to do first, which led to teams not forming or people getting screwed when the potential teammate just does his own mission then drops to go soloing or logs off entirely. The idea of having the game auto-que people together for stuff like that seems strange and new to me though. So I would not do this as part of an arc that could otherwise be soloed, but as a thing unto itself, I could see it.
So what that would give you for content options would then be:
1. Missions, which would require no more than 1 soloer but could be done by a whole full team, with scaling, and would have difficulty set by the solo or the team leader in some way.
2. Segev's new thing, which I'll call "ad hoc teamups" which would be a thing you get in a queue for, either with a teammate or as a solo looking to for a PUG teammate to be matched with. These could be written for anything from 2 to say 8 teammates, and could have anything from 1 to maybe 4 different actual missions or acts or whatever. They could cause the team to have to split up in places, and to have to work together in other places, etc. Would probably feel and work a lot like the Summer Blockbuster Movie thing in CoX, in terms of mechanics. You couild even have the open world's movie theaters be the places where people would congregate to do them.
3. Task Forces, which would be repeatable mission chains with a tough boss at the end and maybe a giant monster or something, which from Tannim222's description would still be doable with anything from a solo to a full team, with scaling.
4. Raids which require something like a full team or more and will scale up from some required minimum, which minimum will be greater than 1, and will not scale down below that minimum.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Either / or and both.
That is there may be team based Challenges, invidual challenges, and invidual challenges what are also team based challenges.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
If you have challenges that can be added or activated like healing, damage dealt, mezzed targets, etc for the team, then building a more diverse team might end up being the way to get the most challenge based rewards for doing a mission. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but I think it would cause me to want to build a team of like 1 scrapper, 1 blaster, 1 healer, 1 controller, etc when doing missions, if at all possible.
Then again, if that gets out of hand, you could have to impose limits on the number of different challenges a team could sign up for in the first place. But if you rolled that challenge limit out after the fact to curb player-earned gains in IGC and items, people would likely complain about having their "preferred play style" nerfed.
Anyway this all sounds interesting, and I think it may be a thing that beta testing would be needed to help you figure out the details in how to best do it.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Or, you know, those challenges could just be automagic, like badges were, in CoH.
Be Well!
Fireheart
Ohh please dont remind me... a few teams I was on, had to give up a number of times, when doing the Cavern of Transcendence. Must have 8 people for 8 Stones to click on at the very same time? BOOOO. :[
The Cavern of Tranny was intended to be THAT hard though, as was the Abandoned Sewer Trial. Those were at lease meant to be challenging (and people resorted to cheating to do them, a lot). The missions you got from contacts that absolutely required another person (which I think they did briefly have, if I'm not remembering this wrong) were just painful for no reason. But yes, anything that comes in a story arc like that, even as the capstone at the end, probably shouldn't require more than 1 person if the rest of the arc didn't. While we're at it, I think the idea of having to unlock a TF by doing an arc that leads up to it is bad. I would have preferred to do the Katie Hannon TF, the Ernesto Hess TF, etc as stand-alone TFs, like the Synapse and the Posi, etc instead of that.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
All i wanted from that Caver of Tran. TF, was for the Stones to match the remaining Members on the TF. And if someone drops again, have every player exit the last caver through the door, and once everyone was out... entering back in would reset the number of stone pillars to match the number of players on team again.
That's all I wanted from Paragon Studios, for TF's like that. >:(
I whole heartedly agree here. I believe, Auto LFG has a dampening effect on a game's culture in at least two ways. (At least that seems to have been what has happened in WoW and Swtor for me when I use the Auto LFG function.) First, if I spent a few hours with folks, I'd add them to a friends list because I really enjoyed and valued the time spent. We actually had conversations and fun moments in our missions and along our travels to the next mission getting to know one another and forming beginnings of friendships. The pacing seemed more natural/real as the distances folks traveled were relevant. It gave me the sense we were all in the same world together. Auto Lfg (with quick travel) eliminates this experience creating a sense of separation from others in the larger (non-instanced) world. I have rarely made friends using LFG and from a certain perspective, I don't blame them since there is less value to my involvement in their game experience -they just need to requeue, and waiting with me may be less efficient etc...
Second, as the incentive to travel manually is reduced to zero folks tend not to explore major areas of content, reducing immersion and long-term interest in the game and all the others within.
Time and space are important, I suppose...
I love the convenience of LFG. But there's an anonymity to it as well that leads to really unprepared and/or immature players who don't take the time and effort it takes to run the content effectively. It also leads to elitists who rage quit a PUG or deride the others if they don't perform to some arbitrary standard.
On the other hand, not having an auto LFG tool means that those same elitists create artificial and often inflated requirements for joining them in a team to begin with. There are well-documented cases in WoW, SWTOR, DCUO and other games that have a 'combat rating' or 'gear score' in that people actually needed a higher gear score to enter content than you could get from loot running the content! huh!?
The natural argument against the elitists is that not everyone is an elitist and not everyone will establish those elite requirements for joining a team. I say you are correct. A good healthy game with a good healthy community should be able to offer enough variety to support all the players. But four months after opening day, how many low levels will there be to choose from to run first tier instances? That is about when most games start implementing auto LFG tools because people can't otherwise find other players to join them.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
I think a solution to the whole someone doing their own missions then leaving could be adding filters to the matchmaking/lfg thing. Such as 'same main mission', 'same level', and side quests are most likely going to relate to to the level like finding a certain piece of loot from a miniboss or something along those lines like in DCUO. As to making it to group missions as Radlac pointed out, forcing it is, well, blaaaaaa and IMO annoying. A lot of people say no and say to solo which is truly disheartening and makes me not want to ask anyone else based on reference.
I think making a recommended number is a good balance on this since it doesn't force you to group, but is giving incentive to find a group. A lot like Skyforge did with its group quests and it works rather efficiently in that game, why not in this one. You constantly see people asking others to join them and not even for just group missions which is recommended 5, but also for squads which allows 3. Although in Skyforge group missions are practically unsoloable. That can be changed in this game though, just putting that in there. I just think that letting people know what the game thinks is best for a balance of fun and challenge makes people want to attain that recommendation. Up until the point of it becoming tedious of course. I for one love co-op, but always had trouble forming groups which was why I always got bored of any MMO real fast. Im a social person and enjoy communication. And I like the idea of fighting alongside others feeling the same struggle as the guy next to you. Idk ideas ideas ideas
As foolish as this seems,
Gotem.
From ya boy, Elios.
Yeah, my problem with those auto-grouping systems is they leave no room for negotiation or variation. Granted, the issue with the CoH LFG system was that it depended on a Team Leader to research and make invites. If the Lead knew a lot of people, or was otherwise good at organization, information, and recruiting, they could pull together a good team, quickly. And, if they were any sort of jerk, you could be stuck, hanging around in limbo, while the Lead dithered on the team-invites.
The auto-group systems do a good job of pulling together a team on the fly, but they prevent transparency, so a player won't see who they're teamed with until the system says, "There, you're a team, be good friends and succeed!" And then the mission starts, and you've little time to socialize.
Those auto-group systems also assemble 'cookie-cutter teams' based on team 'position' - one Pitcher, one Catcher, one Shortstop, etc. They ignore the Controller who can tank and/or heal, or the Tanker specced for DPS, or the Defender with no active healing powers. No variation, no flexibility, you'll never end up on an all-Defender team, with an auto-group system like that.
I think, what is needed is more of an 'auto-assist' for team leaders and people interested in a team. Could one open a LFG window and be presented with a dozen(s) mini-profiles of characters nearby, near the same level, with similar missions, guild-mates, friends, that one has played with before - all manner of filters. Also, it should have integrated chat, so potential teammates can be asked if they want to join.
I recall, one time in CoH, I was a melee-character and at the end of the mission, the goal changed to 'Prevent the Boss from Escaping!' And, sure enough, the guy took off and I Could... NOT... Get... Enough... HITS on him to bring him down before he escaped and the mission failed. So I exited quick and reset the mission, and broadcast a plea for a Controller to come and lock that bugger down. Instead, a Dark/Dark Defender showed up and we Slowed the jerk to a crawl and Arrested his butt.
My point, if I have one, is that I had been flagged LFG all night and so had the Defender - neither of us had gotten an invite. We hooked up for my mission and a few theirs and then broke up, two heroes being all it took to have a good time. We connected, negotiated, and joined up over Chat channels, not the LFG system. If there had been an Auto-Group feature, a Defender would not have been chosen to help me and it would have forced me to wait for more than just a happy duo. I would want a tool to make a task easier, not something that does it for me.
Be Well!
Fireheart
That's it. Right there.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
+1. Correct.
And since MWM's stated goal is to discard what didn't work in CoH, retain what did, and take the things that worked a step further, it wouldn't make sense to take one of CoH's most lauded systems--the one that created unprecedented ease and fun of teaming--and go in a different direction with it.
Especially not a direction that has been shown to foster a very different feel and spirit in other games.
FIGHT EVIL! (or go cause trouble so the Heroes have something to do.)
When STO first launched every time you entered a different system you could get auto-teamed with people and I didn't like it at all.
As long as it's optional (and off by default) I think it could be handy to have a menu of missions or mission types you can select for which you are available for auto-teaming.
I also found the system we had in CoX to be perfectly adequate but I wasn't one to spam zone chat for hours on end LFT. I usually said it once and then soloed until an invite came in.
"I don't think you understand the gravity of your situation."
I've seen chat channels called "Trade", "LFG", "Recruit", "Shout", etc. Foolish mortals. Everyone knows that no matter what you call a chat channel, it will be used for whatever the community wants to use it for. And if you acknowledge this and create a channel called "general bullshit" then no one will use it for general chat because everyone will have blocked it or filtered it. You see, the irony is that no one wants to be subjected to general bullshit, but everyone wants to be heard when they want to be heard, whether its general bullshit or not. So they'll find a way to be heard.
The only way to keep chat channels on-purpose is to have a near-constant chat police. So that LFG channel we want? Yep. It'll be full of general crap if people know that everyone reads it. Self policing is possible. Self-policing is pretty easy, and as long as enough people are applying enough peer pressure to keep the LFG channel on-topic, then we can keep it a good tool to LFG without having to resort to a LFG auto-tool.
I've seen a LFG bulletin Board in use in some games. I like it. You post what content you want to run, announce you are looking for a party and other people who also want to run that content can look at your post and send you a message if they want to join. Blade and Soul does this. The Blade & Soul implementation is clunky and could use improvement, but it is definitely the right direction. In it, after you state you want to start a team, the system sends out a LFG request in chat for you. It sends it once. Everyone knows what a LFG message looks like when it shows up in global chat. Anyone interested can click on the link it includes and the system opens up your team proposal window. And if you didn't see the invite, you can still open up the "looking for a team" window to see all the teams that others have proposed, what level, what content, what they are looking for, etc. If nothing meets what you are looking for, then you can make your own. Pretty cool.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Bastards stole that suggestion i made for CoT long ago. >:(
Mumble Mumble Grumble... :/
Agreed.
Though I do know that I was willing and able to form teams when I wanted to. That made life easy for me. There are others who are not comfortable with doing that. It's just not in their nature. They are the types who put "LFT" out and just wait for someone to invite them. So having an option for them to be a part of an auto-teaming function would be good for them. But "option" is key. I wouldn't want it.
I always liked when people would list what their power set was so I could see it when I was forming a team. I mean, I know the difference between "Healer" and "Dark/Dark" beside a Defender's name. (LOVED DD Defenders!) And I knew that an Earth or Mind Controller was going to lock down the frigging room. Some other things like "Looking for TF" or "Looking for AV mishes" helped too. Not sure how to make that sort of thing show up automatically, but seems like it would help.
I wasn't often a team leader by choice. I'd much rather follow along. Still I primarily used the LFT finder in COH to build teams. I'd usually send a quick message before inviting anyone. Something along the lines of what we were doing or if we needed something specific if they could fill that role. If they replied I'd usually invite them. And I'd usually ask my SG if anyone was interested in joining and ask the team to ask their SG's for the same. Between these two methods I could maintain a team of 6-8 without a whole lot of effort.
I think if anything should be done to the LFT interface is make it a bit more streamlined to do those things. Allow LFT individuals to post what they are and what they are looking for, 140 character limit? and allow team leads to quickly start a chat with that person. Going a step farther would be to create the reverse, a TLFT Team Looking For Teammates window that would give individual players a quick break down of the team and show number of members and allow the team lead to specify what they are up to. Effectively creating a two way street where once there was only one. Perhaps team leaders could also use this window and have the option to quickly and easily merge two smaller teams. As far as who takes the lead afterward...that's for the devs to sort out. It could be a random pick between the existing leads and then the players could pass the star. Or we could ditch the star entirely and allow all players access to the LFT and TFLT windows but that may cause other problems.
Second Chance: https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/CityOfTitans/SecondChance/
Dev Tracker: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/fixing-dev-digest
Dev Comments: https://cityoftitans.com/forum/dev-comments
Very cool idea! Don't know if it's doable or a pain in the butt for devs, but it certainly sounds cool. I used to run into the "lets merge our teams" thing a lot. It got complicated with one team having to disband and send all the names to the other team leader for invites.
The "star" thing never seemed to be a big problem since I got the sense that most players didn't actually want it and were more than willing to pass it if needed.
Some good suggestions in here.
I used the team window a lot to create teams and while it was usually not difficult, it definitely required effort; I would often have to pm randoms to see if they would be keen on a piece of content. Times of day had a large impact on the efficacy of that system. People playing during off-hours invariably had a harder time of it, so assistive tools would be a good idea in particular for them, and for anyone with accessibility challenges.
Having a large friends list helped, although it could have been bigger. I'm not a social person (understatement, much) and yet somehow in CoH I had a longer friends list than anywhere else in my life, including other MMOs. That was partly due to the Team mechanism, partly due to the chat system, and partly due to the awesome community. I would definitely want to retain some of that social element in forming teams, but at the same time have it be a bit easier to identify, and engage with, potential teammates.
Finally, I will second that most players in my experience, in any MMO, don't actually want the responsibility of holding the star, even if they end up leading during the execution of the content. Quite often I've offered to be the star and just managed disputes or organisational issues and logistic considerations, while leaving the actual "leading" up to the person who knows the content. At times I've never even heard of the content in question, and I'm just along for the ride or because people grouping usually means more challenge, or fun, or both.
of Phoenix Rising
Am I
Pages