Tokyo
-
Posts
1367 -
Joined
-
Quote:I'm a d!ck in PvP because I am compensating for my lack of one IRL.Originally Posted by CrazyJerseyan
good 1 (thumbs up).
Everyone has their own reason for being a d!ck in PvP.
My e-peen is huge! <3 -
Quote:I'm going by what Castle stated, not what he or I meant. He said It can be implemented but it's unlikely.Originally Posted by Lemur Lad
If when you say "can be implemented" you mean "yes we can write it down on paper as a potential idea and think of a couple ways it might work" then yes you're right. However that's basically theoretical. It's not like it's an easy switch or something that can be readily applied to PvE, which is what some folks seem to be implying.
That settles the argument for me. -
Quote:Awesome, thanks for the link. So DR CAN be implemented and the devs HAVE considered such a feature in a limited capacity; however, it's unlikely that it will.Originally Posted by Lemur Lad
Wish Granted
In the future, I recommend following the dev digest so you can keep up to speed on discussions like this.
That's good enough for me. -
Quote:I have never said I would supply evidence, I said I would supply examples to support my opinion that IO bonuses should be subject to a feature that limits their benefits.Originally Posted by Sigium
I was once kicked from a group because I had too many IOs and they wanted someone more 'beginner friendly' for their newbie players. I've also been told by a large number of teams:
"We don't mind SOs. It's not the enhancements that make the powers!" or some form of 'the power lies in the POWER, not the enhancements'.
You have given anecdotal evidence, and now I have. This is evidence why PvE is just fine with IOs.
You're free to disagree by explaining your own experiences. Your experiences don't discredit my own. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
PvP=/!/=PvE
There is no comparison. There never has been. IOs in PvE dont matter to anyone other than the player becuase you are all on the same team, so it benefits them it benefits you.
Brute can do more DPS than yours? That means enemies die faster.
Defender can H34lz0r more than you? That means you die less.
Dom can perma-dom? That means the mobs get to attack less.
The list goes on and on and on.
Leave PvE alone. It works fine. Yes, PvP is mostly broken, and yes it needs fixing. Thats a whole seperate issue.
And no, its not an amazing idea. If this is all a joke, then I can grin and appreciate it, because some of the comments are funny indeed. If this is actually a serious question...
The serious answer is No.
Not sure what this has to do with the post you quoted. I stated it shouldn't be comparable (the same to PvPs DR) in that post.
of course another suggestion would be to keep ED for IO's and remove ED for SO's and have the player decide whether they want to structure their build around SO's or IO's so that both enhancements have benefits.
That would be a completely seperate thread of course and I'm not even sure it could be done or whether it would actually be a "good" idea. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
You have given anecdotal evidence, which can easily be countered with anecdotal evidence the other way. You say that these things have happened, I can say that they don't happen all that often. If the chance of occurrence is low, then the problem is not really something that the Devs need to address, especially if it's just player action involved, and not a game mechanic that is enforcing it.
You do not need to explain how reducing set bonuses would make the game more challenging. What you need to explain is why the game needs to be more challenging, and if it does, why player choices shouldn't come into play. The game has a wide variety of challenge settings already. Why should those who choose to build in such a way so as to minimize the challenge be forced to play to what you can build?
You've been told already in this thread that if GR was brought into the PvE game, how the entire slew of enemies would need to be reworked for it, and how all of the player powers would need to be reworked because of it, and how the Devs have tried it, seen the numbers, and have said that it's not going to happen because of all the work involved (plus how the players would react), and yet you still say that it would be less work than other options. I fail to see how you can come to that conclusion, when you have no evidence to back it up, and everything that we've heard from the devs has the exact opposite conclusion.
....
You asked for examples of why IO bonuses should be subject to DR. I provided examples through explaining personal experiences. Of course they are anecdotal.
if you need evidence that IO sets offer a disparate advantage to SO's please jump on Mid's.
How would "the entire slew of enemies" need to be reworked when the system doesn't account for IO's or bonuses in the first place?
Please link me to a post where the Devs have explicitly stated "We would have to rework the entire system. If bonuses were subject to a diminishing return in PvE." I don't buy it.
I will, however, buy that the Devs won't implement a DR like feature because they feel the PvE community do not want it. -
Quote:Best to slot achilles heel in your Enforcers. Lady grey negative damage is also A good choice. Both have a very good chance to proc.Originally Posted by Rinkoz
Ive been leveling my thug mm lately and while making a build in mids I came across something, I know Soulbound build up proc works fine but for Enforcers you can slot them with a Gaussian's build up proc, does that activate just when thier summoned or work just like Soulbound proc would?
My experience with Gaussian's and soulbound is that they tend to proc when you summon. Rarely if ever while they are active. -
Quote:I've already given examples. You don't want to accept those examples. IO bonuses have little to do with skill and or experience and more to do with giving the player an advantage over SOed builds which the current system utilizes as its framework.Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
However, you have yet to demonstate why the gulf between those who have IOs and those who don't needs to be shallowed.
You have also yet to show why your idea is the best, or even a better, choice for making the game more challenging.
Perhaps it isn't the "best" however it's the quickest solution "I feel" to balance IO bonuses for a SO system. the other solution would be to rework the entire mission and TF system to compensate for IO's and set bonuses. That seems like much more work.
Do I really need to explain why reducing set bonuses would make running missions and TFs more challenging? -
Quote:Originally Posted by Lemur Lad
If you think Arcana was making belittling statements, you're at the stage where you're deliberately trying to derail the thread.
Address this point for me. Don't sidestep: The devs have specifically said they know by looking at the numbers that this system will not work in PvE. How does you repeating over and over "I really want it" change that?
Basically all you've been doing is repeating yourself without coming any compelling reasons why such a radical change would improve the game.
You either aren't reading or I can't compel you to agree with my argument. That's all.
Reducing the benefits of IO bonuses isn't impossible in PvE and that's what I've been suggesting by implementing a Diminishing returns feature.
I believe by adding a diminishing return feature it will make the game much more challenging. It would also shallow the gulf between those that don't have IOs and those that do.
That has been my argument.
You're free to disagree. -
Quote:All the elite PvPers are gone. They knew when to give up. What's left are the Noob Elite.Originally Posted by Supermax
Yeah, sorry I'm late.
But seriously, I could name 5 elite PvP'ers. The average is a lot lower now, so it's much easier to pick out the best. We had a thread about it recently, and most posters mentioned the same 5-6 guys. -
PvP advice to PvErs? Alright, here goes:
Go somewhere else. -
Quote:Good argument. Ask the Devs.Originally Posted by Ignatz
Why not argue then to remove IO's completely? Why have them if they're just going to be diminished for purposes of balance?
-
Quote:I'd reconsider opting out of leadership for TA.Originally Posted by Kranik
Ok, I read over it all and here's what I came up with
Your damage will be coming from your Ninjas and your best Secondary Powers don't have an accuracy check (Oil and Glue Arrow) TA itself has decent accuracy.
Take Speed for hasten and jumping.
Just a suggestion of course.
this build will also work fantasticly in PvP if you ever get the inclination. -
Quote:Did I say comparable? I said PvP "like." I never said comparable.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I was going to respond to your other statements, but I've decided instead to simply state have FUN beating your head against this particular rock, because PvE isn't going to ever get pervasive diminishing returns comparable to the PvP system, ever.
And let me know if you want to bet on it.
If you don't have a follow up argument, that's fine by me. I realize a comparable DR system won't make it into PvE, it wouldn't make sense to implement the same system. But a DR system that's "like" PvP that decreases the benefits of IO and their bonuses for the purposes of balance. I still do not see as a bad idea. -
Quote:I was asked to give examples of instances where someone was excluded from a team because of the lack of IO bonuses. So I sited my own experience.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Unless pohsyb has been torturing new players again, there's no way your team mates could have known what your recharge was. The only way that statement makes sense is if you were kicked for an exemplared high level empath that was presumed to have superior slotting to you, inventions or not.
In any case, I still don't bother slotting IOs except what happen to drop automatically until basically level 50 (sometimes I start at level 47 for obvious reasons). I've never been interrogated on my build by strangers on a team, and I'd tell anyone who did for the purposes of determining my fitness to be on the team to go climb a tree.
Plus, I can solo Positron. With SOs. If your team mates needed an extra couple of percent of global recharge for Positron, they had problems that DR isn't going to fix.
On the subject of implementing DR game-wide, while I recognize the intent of DR in PvP, I don't agree with the DR curve implementation. As a result, I would oppose implementing it in PvE, and the devs know this. However, that's a moot point because Castle is never going to do that.
On the subject of inventions in general: the devs have stated repeatedly and directly that the point of the invention system is to provide higher levels of performance for players that want to participate in it. Its optional in the sense that they are not needed to be competitive with the PvE content as originally designed. However, if your definition of "optional" is different, then your definition of optional is incompatible with the game's design.
I was excluded from that particular TF because my Emp was not equipped with IOs. Therefore the team leader concluded that my build was inadequate.
The second time I was excluded from a team because of my build was a LRSF. My dom was not perma so they opted not to take me.
These were two instances and I'm positive i'm not the only one that has experienced this.
While many team leaders might not be forward about their selections, they DO many times check for IO bonuses.
I'm glad you can solo-positron with SOs. I'm sure that comes with some experience. Experience I have yet to gain and many others have yet to.
While you don't agree DR is needed, I'm going to continue to disagree. I only see a widening gap between the performance of IOed and SOed builds once GR comes out and "super-powered" is included into the formula.
IO's are optional. My definition isn't incompatible with the games design. However, being at a very large disadvantage to IOed builds isn't FUN. It wasn't fun in PvP for casual gamers and that's why it was changed.
And please leave the belittling statements to the PvP threads, Arcana. -
Quote:I don't know. The fact that they were able to predict this might happen seems to lend that thread some credibility.Originally Posted by Aura_Familia
Troll attempt is troll worthy:
Multiple people have lost credibility as far as I'm concerned.
Carry on.
You mean to tell me you don't believe that there should be some form of function in place to balance PvE so that PvE maintains it's difficulty for all range of players?
the game currently doesn't take into consideration IOs or benefits gained from. So why is a DR like function in order to balance this disparity in the game not your flavor? -
Quote:If come GR we are still using a system that uses SO's, i'm concerned that the difficulty will be even easier than it is now for those who have IO'ed out toons, more so when you include the potential of being "super-powered."Originally Posted by Alpha_Zulu
To the OP.
Great idea. I support this. We need this implemented with GR.
If the difficulty of the new content is raised to compensate for IO bonuses and being "super-powered." Won't that exclude most people who only have SO's?
If that's the case why not implement something similar to DR in PvE in order to balance the playing field. -
Quote:It's much easier and cheaper to implement DR than it is to build challenging content that still works on the basis of builds running on SOs.Originally Posted by Aura_Familia
There should be challenging content built.
That is all.
You don't need DR to build challenging content.
That is all. -
Quote:And adding DR to PvE will simply lower the amount by which IOed characters will be better than SOed characters.Originally Posted by MajorPrankster
It was certainly not the magic fix for PvP. DR simply lowered the amount by which IOed characters were better.
Aett stated previously that the game is built around the idea that a character is built with SOs.
So aren't IOs and their bonuses a significant advantage? All DR would do is balance the IO builds so that their bonuses wouldn't be as drastic.
Adding DR would make much more sense and be much easier to implement than going into the game and balancing PvE for IOs, don't you think? -
Quote:I'm just as serious as I was when I posted those PvP builds you and Conflict commented on, Mac.Originally Posted by macskull
You're joking, I assume?
-
Quote:Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
So screw everyone, just because you're not happy?
True enough. I'll do that here.
1) I have some builds, with IOs used to plug some holes, or to make them more effective.
2) I have some builds, with fun IOs used to make the character more fun, but probably less effective overall. Things such as +KB effects on melee characters, and the like.
3) I have other builds, including my namesake character, that use only basic IOs, and don't use sets at all.
4) I have other builds, that still use only SOs.
I have never had a problem getting or staying on a team with any of these characters.
Also, trying to get PvP changes reverted or even changed because the system isn't considered popular by the PvE crowd here probably isn't going to work.
In PvP, you do need much more balancing than in PvE. In PvP, having someone that always wins doesn't work. In PvE, everyone always wins, really, so it's not a problem, and you want to be able to have different challenge levels for everyone.
So it's fair to say that most if not all your builds benefit from IOs.
I'm not trying to get change to PvP. I'd have to be a noob to expect anything to get changed considering PvPers have tried before.
PvE challenge levels can be changed and more features were added just for this purpose in i16. This doesn't take IO bonuses.
And no, everyone does not always win in PvE. I've been in TFs where the team was unable to finish.
No where did I say "screw everyone else" I am saying introducing DR will help to balance SO and IOed out builds. -
Quote:Again, I never said it was. But the devs are capable of implementing a feature that would make bonuses less of an advantage.Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
You have been teaming with jerks. Again: not the Dev's faults.
by the way, you didn't answer my previous post:
Quote:I'm going go out on a limb here and assume you have a couple of IOed out builds with quite a few bonuses in order to compensate for gaps in your build or to benefit your recovery and regen. -
Quote:No, you didn't HAVE something like DR in order to balance IOed builds vs SOed builds back then. Now you do.Originally Posted by Lemur Lad
Actually, it isn't what they'd want. Back in those days, there were only a few specific powersets and builds people wanted to team with, and anything they felt was gimp had a lot of trouble getting teams because they had no way to compensate for a choice they made when they created the character and can't alter.
Nowadays, even without IOs, only very rarely does anyone care what powersets you have, since the powers have been much better balanced, and people have gotten over the prejudice, because seeing IOs and SOs together has taught them that anyone can be effective with any powerset.
I'll let you in on a secret. I have characters that I've leveled all the way to 32 without investing in more than a few key enhancers. Over half the slots were empty or red. I still got on teams, and I still got compliments on my play, and I still made friends, even with people who had been spending time and money on IOing their characters. I wasn't deadweight, I wasn't a drain on the teams, but I also didn't need something like DR to make things "fair" for me versus the people with better gear.
I don't see how it is unfair to balance the PvE game now when they have the ability to do it. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Twilight_Snow
To Tokyo:
Actually, the original CoH is what you want. At that time, everybody had the same stuffs. I bet the design is that players can have fun through combat, rather than having "fun" (it should be satisfaction and sense of accomplishment, but most people also call it fun) through equipping a character.
The good thing about the original design is that players won't feel gimped. The bad thing is that players can't be uber. And also, there is nothing for a level 50 to do. With the advent of IO and market, CoH is no longer the same. Now, the good thing is that level 50 can have something to work on, so the uber can be uber. The bad thing is that some players become relatively under-performing. Fortunately, CoH is still on the casual side among MMOs, a character won't be trash even if it's not well-equipped.
I don't know, both the old and new systems have their good and bad, but you can only pick one. From the dev point of view, they try to make people subscribe longer. So, it's natural that they want to introduce things (IO in this case) that can make players work on for a extended period of time. Maybe, IO does not have much to do with game design, but merely a tool for the company to sustain a steady inflow of money.
I probably would have liked old CoH. I have been kicked a few times from teams because of my build wasn't up to the teams standards.
a week or two ago my emp was kicked from a posi because they said my recharge would be too low and they wanted a emp that would perform better. meaning one with more recharge bonuses.
recently I was kicked from a lRSF because my dom wasn't a perma dom.
While Aett says bonuses don't effect how much more useful or effective you are on a team, I disagree. Bonuses do offer a large advantage and many times they are a deciding factor on whether you get chosen for a team and how well you run PvE content. -
Quote:I'm going go out on a limb here and assume you have a couple of IOed out builds with quite a few bonuses in order to compensate for gaps in your build or to benefit your recovery and regen.Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
I wouldn't be surprised. If I played PvP at all, I probably would've been campaigning against the changes. But I think it would've been hypocritical of me to say that changes were bad to a system I didn't care about. I figured that the PvPers had more weight in that department.