Which means that, in those cases, playing an AT with the DR-bug was potentially easier since they would be doing more damage than the FF would with a similar build. I know for sure that Behemothking bouncing through the QWZ one-shotting mobs on his Unleashed before they can appreciably hurt him didn't look like the intended experience, lol
Yes. But the intended experience probably didn't have that level of gear creep in it, either. If you don't have 600 in a stat it works a little differently.
Well yes, the intended experience also didn't have the DR bug. It's difficult to really peg "the intended experience" anyway, since it's a super hero game. I think the experience runs the gamut from "superman beating up low level thugs like nothing" to "somehow Stick Swinging Boy has found himself as part of a cosmic battle against a god but gosh darn it he's gonna help!". Especially nowadays now that we have some challenging content so that we can have "superman fighting super threats" as well. CO's intended experience is a beautiful rainbow of diversity! \o/
Otherwise why even bother being a freeform is kinda the whole point.
I dunno, making fun creative builds? Mind blowing concept, I know. I have a thread where I show off some of my characters, so you can just go watch that. Need a link?
Well yes, the intended experience also didn't have the DR bug.
It wouldn't, since the gear which made the DR bug Suddenly Very Urgent And In Need Of A Fix wasn't in the game at the time it was (mostly) written.
CO's intended experience is a beautiful rainbow of diversity! \o/
It is. Generally a good thing, occasionally a problem, since it does allow for those "Stick Swinging Boy vs Galactus" moments generally avoided by sensible comic editors. From my point of view ( where the intended experience is Silver Age comics) then many ATs, run with standard gear, in normal content, hit the spot quite nicely. And that (in relation to the question in the OP) was all I came to say.
From my point of view ( where the intended experience is Silver Age comics) then many ATs, run with standard gear, in normal content, hit the spot quite nicely. And that (in relation to the question in the OP) was all I came to say.
Yeah, that's why I'm glad we got the new content that's tuned to provide that experience with current gear.
You are full of it Spinny. Every freeform under the sun piles on as much buffs, heals etc to give a tactical advantage. Otherwise why even bother being a freeform is kinda the whole point. I hate liars for the record and compulsive ones even more. -wink-
Many of us make characters that don't load up on heals, ADs, AOs, or cheese. If we did then all of us Altoholics would be non-existent... there is no fun in repeating the same build a dozen times. me personally, I don't take ADs on my DPS builds and the only time I have 2 ADs is if I'm using PFF as my passive on a tank. Sure I try to include a heal on everyone, but not everyone gets a solid heal, some have far less reliable self-healing options because they fit their theme better.
Otherwise why even bother being a freeform is kinda the whole point.
I dunno, making fun creative builds? Mind blowing concept, I know. I have a thread where I show off some of my characters, so you can just go watch that. Need a link?
Yeah one of my characters uses a mix of powers(might/ice/fire) that no AT has ever had.
Simple thoughts: Nothing new, everyone has already argued for and against a great many things. I just want to be a part of stuff. I think there should be a clear tier system for the classes.
Free ATs - Should be good enough to do Alerts and contribute to Adventure packs. They should be (primarily) team reliant. Think sidekicks, street heroes, or teen superheros and the like. Participating in Cosmics are only achievable with intense focus and dedication. Think of any team focused comic book hero that if they were on their own, would probably get their butts kicked versus the BIG BAD. Killing mooks is more their thing and they are good at it.
Paid for ATs - Pro heroes, the big leagues, they can contribute to Cosmics just fine, pretty much carry Alerts, and have the tools so solo an Adventure pack if they want too (even though some of those take FOREVER!) These are your heroes that started in a SG but eventually were given their own dedicated or one shot comic book.
Free Forms - (Gimping your build aside.) These are the Planet-Crackers and Paragons of superhero-dom. They should be on the front line and the "Class" everyone aspires to be. These were the Heroes that had their own comic book first, but only sided with a SG for story reasons. With proper knowledge and skill these guys should be able to handle any and all content on their own, with the exception of Cosmics, but they remain the top contributors, end game wise, in whatever role they chose.
Silver AT = Team orientated heroes. Sidekicks. Supporting cast. Would get trashed by the Big Bad on their own. Only stars in a team comic book, is in a bad TV show. Usually part of some trope, might even be color coordinated. Wants to be a break out character, cant get enough fans. Kids still want to be the red one, but you all cant be the red one. Character building is limited to a hand full of either/or choices = Free
Premium AT = Protects the city, does most things solo, teams up versus the big bad. Does get their own solo comic book series from time to time, but mostly known as a leading role in a comic book team. Has had at least 2 successful seasons in a TV show before everything went to crud, then they started teaming up to remain relevant. Character building has a LOT more either/or choices = You pay for it.
Freeform A = Planet-cracker, the flagship superhero. Started with their own comic book, the BAD has to be TOO BIG in order to warrant a team up. Shows up in graphic novels a lot, comic book geeks will know who they are, say they are on par with the mainstream heroes, no one cares. Probably won some obscure award for best written comic no one has read. Has some killer straight to video releases, maybe a "Netvidz Original." Show gets cancelled for not selling merch for some reason, but people love the character regardless. Has the most kickstarters and gofundmes to get thier show put back on the air AGAIN. Companies ignore them. Character building has all choices opened but really not a ton of cosmetic control. = You pay your 50 bucks. Or get lucky and get one for half price or free like I did.
Freeform B = Planet-cracker, the box office superhero. Started with their own comic book, probably has a movie franchise and some other popular merch. Their names are plastered everywhere. Overhyped. Had TV shows, movies, cartoons, flash videos, fanfics, and more. We get sick of seeing their origin stories over and over again. We still buy their t-shirts, posters and all that other junk. Little timmy just got on board the hype train and will claim he knows more about the character than you do because he read this one wiki page. So many cosplay and alternative cosplay, multiverse cosplays and more. Even ends up in the news because of some marketing ploy controversy. The BAD has to be TOO BIG in order to warrant a team up, or if the cash is right and it will push more merch. Character building has all choices opened and full cosmetic control = You pay monthly for it.
How is that job as Trump's Press Secretary panning out, spinny?
Yeah, that's why I'm glad we got the new content that's tuned to provide that experience with current gear.
It does, but only for the people who have oodles of knowledge, already acquired massive stacks of resources, and who are willing/enthusiastic enough to play awful content like Onslaught in order to get that gear. And great if you do - enjoy that content. But otherwise I think the ladder up from levelling content to Cosmics/TA is very, very steep and doesn't have a lot of steps along the way, leading to jumps that are too big for many AT players to make while still remaining fun to play. Hopefully all the work they're doing with queueable Lairs and Crises will make a difference, although it would be nice to have some of the options we have with PvP - AT only queues, for example - or some post 40 measure of power to help make team-building more equal and fun.
Most ATs are probably closer than well-built FFs (with notable exceptions such as the Unleashed, which is still well above what the developers probably want in terms of power). Not all FFs are well-built, though. They can be, if the player wants, but that doesn't guarantee they will be.
It isn't necessary for ATs to compete with FFs in endgame content. Different abilities and classes excel in different situations, and there's nothing wrong with that, so long as there is content where there is a corresponding advantage. As a rough example, if FFs had an inherent +50% damage resistance vs Cosmics and ATs had +50% damage resistance vs Nemeses, that would be acceptable. The numbers wouldn't even need to be the same.
At no point have I expressed interest in invalidating anything, though I'm sure you'll try to argue otherwise.
Balance existed in some form before the patch, because both ATs and FFs possessed advantages over each other. In addition, in the long forgotten past back when PvP wasn't dead, ATs had the advantage of being able to enter AT-specific matches. Hypothetically, if ATs were to be given some new AT-specific advantage tomorrow, balance could be re-established, without threatening the overall mechanical dominance of FFs (in much the same way that birds can fly, but that doesn't stop mammals from occupying and dominating many, many more ecological niches than they do).
Some claimed FFs cost money. I pointed out that they did not have to. It doesn't affect balance either way.
Classless systems, despite the name, aren't actually classless. They simply have one single class to which every player belongs. In this way, class is removed as a factor. The introduction of ATs didn't introduce classes into the game; it introduced more classes into the game.
FFs can't take any option they want. There are a wide variety of enemy-only abilities that FFs do not have access to, for example. More importantly, FFs have to obey tier requirements and such.
I shouldn't have to support a claim that is common sense (even people on your side of the argument in this thread have referred to FF as a class), but if you insist, let's go look up a definition: [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_class[/url]
[quote]a common method of arbitrating the capabilities of different game characters...A character class aggregates several abilities and aptitudes[/quote]
FF qualifies. But even if you could find some way to change the definition of what a class is to suit your purposes, it wouldn't change the fact that your argument is nonsensical. You are literally arguing that intentional imbalance is balanced. Such a position is absurd, and all you have to support it are red herrings.
Balance is determined by the presence or absence of mechanical advantages. Opinion and developer intent do not enter into it. The very idea that they could is absurd. If opinion mattered in balance, then balance discussions would be impossible. And as for developer intent, well, I've already went over why that's a dishonest argument (people disagree with the developer's intent all the time for balance reasons). Moreover, it's unlikely that the development team would have a unified view of what the game should be to begin with (and even if they did, it can and has changed over time).
The game is less balanced than it was before. That is a fact. You may consider it a positive thing in this particular case, and you are entitled to that opinion. That doesn't have anything to do with what I'm pointing out, though.
Most ATs are probably closer than well-built FFs (with notable exceptions such as the Unleashed, which is still well above what the developers probably want in terms of power). Not all FFs are well-built, though. They can be, if the player wants, but that doesn't guarantee they will be.
The ATs that have had recent balance passes or recently released are closer to well-built FFs, and only because the player base had a direct hand in their development this time around.
It isn't necessary for ATs to compete with FFs in endgame content. Different abilities and classes excel in different situations, and there's nothing wrong with that, so long as there is content where there is a corresponding advantage. As a rough example, if FFs had an inherent +50% damage resistance vs Cosmics and ATs had +50% damage resistance vs Nemeses, that would be acceptable. The numbers wouldn't even need to be the same.
The ATs that have had recent balance passes or recently released are closer to well-built FFs, and only because the player base had a direct hand in their development this time around.[/quote]
Actually, it is necessary for ATs to compete with FF in endgame. Is it nessesary for them to have an edge in endgame? No. But it is necessary for them to be able to compete. It is a sign of bad design if you introduce classes to a game that cannot compete in the endgame content of a game.
Balance existed in some form before the patch, because both ATs and FFs possessed advantages over each other. In addition, in the long forgotten past back when PvP wasn't dead, ATs had the advantage of being able to enter AT-specific matches. Hypothetically, if ATs were to be given some new AT-specific advantage tomorrow, balance could be re-established, without threatening the overall mechanical dominance of FFs (in much the same way that birds can fly, but that doesn't stop mammals from occupying and dominating many, many more ecological niches than they do).
Giving either side a direct advantage is NOT balance. Balance between ATs and FFs can be achieved by simply giving ATs the full number of available powers, and continuing the trend of allowing the player base to influence the design of new ATs and passes on existing ATs to give them more reliable builds.
Some claimed FFs cost money. I pointed out that they did not have to. It doesn't affect balance either way.
Actually, the claims were that FF are paid content. And they are. You either pay for them with cash or you pay for them with time. Either way they have a large investment cost, $20-$40 each or 3-6 months each to buy them outright, and the discounted price even has a time investment of it's own.
Classless systems, despite the name, aren't actually classless. They simply have one single class to which every player belongs. In this way, class is removed as a factor. The introduction of ATs didn't introduce classes into the game; it introduced more classes into the game.
FFs can't take any option they want. There are a wide variety of enemy-only abilities that FFs do not have access to, for example. More importantly, FFs have to obey tier requirements and such.
I shouldn't have to support a claim that is common sense (even people on your side of the argument in this thread have referred to FF as a class), but if you insist, let's go look up a definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_class
a common method of arbitrating the capabilities of different game characters...A character class aggregates several abilities and aptitudes
FF qualifies. But even if you could find some way to change the definition of what a class is to suit your purposes, it wouldn't change the fact that your argument is nonsensical. You are literally arguing that intentional imbalance is balanced. Such a position is absurd, and all you have to support it are red herrings.
Perhaps you should try reading the complete article before making your baseless claims. The very same article you are trying to use to justify your claim also expressly identifies classless games.
Also, lets take a look at the full quote that you truncated:
In role-playing games (RPG), a common method of arbitrating the capabilities of different game characters is to assign each one to a character class. A character class aggregates several abilities and aptitudes, and may also detail aspects of background and social standing, or impose behavior restrictions. Classes may be considered to represent archetypes, or specific careers.
Well the first part is actually unrelated to the definition, it's a mere quantification. The next line is a generalization not a definition. And then the third line that you left off entirely is a usage example. Wikipedia really is a terrible source for definitions.
Balance is determined by the presence or absence of mechanical advantages. Opinion and developer intent do not enter into it. The very idea that they could is absurd. If opinion mattered in balance, then balance discussions would be impossible. And as for developer intent, well, I've already went over why that's a dishonest argument (people disagree with the developer's intent all the time for balance reasons). Moreover, it's unlikely that the development team would have a unified view of what the game should be to begin with (and even if they did, it can and has changed over time).
Developer intent very well does factor into balance. It's not the only factor, but it is a factor. Mechanics can say "this is imbalanced" but it is the developers intent on how a power should function that ultimately determines how said balance is achieved. If you balance purely on mechanics then every thing ends up identical. If a power is intended to be a heavy hitting power with a short or no CD, then it may get balanced through having it's power cost increased and/or it's activation time increased. If the balance issue with that same power was that it's damage scaled up too fast, then it might have it's base damage reduced with an innate damage multiplier to reduce the rate that it scales while leaving the minimum damage alone.
The game is less balanced than it was before. That is a fact. You may consider it a positive thing in this particular case, and you are entitled to that opinion. That doesn't have anything to do with what I'm pointing out, though.
The game is far more balanced than it was before. The DR bug resulted in a situation where 1+1 = 3 if you played an AT. You've made it very clear that you don't actually want balance. You want ATs to have an innate advantage. advantages do not equate balance. The only reason why ATs are not able to be properly balanced to FFs in their current state is because FFs can have more powers. If ATs are given 2 more powers to bring them up to the 14 powers that FFs get then balance can be achieved. With those 2 extra powers they can insure that all ATs have a self heal, a self buff (AO or AD), a block replacer, a lunge (for melee ATs), a threat wipe (for DPS ATs), etc... Most ATs are only missing 1 of those items, and a few are missing 2, but none are missing more than 2.
Developer intent very well does factor into balance. It's not the only factor, but it is a factor. Mechanics can say "this is imbalanced" but it is the developers intent on how a power should function that ultimately determines how said balance is achieved. If you balance purely on mechanics then every thing ends up identical. If a power is intended to be a heavy hitting power with a short or no CD, then it may get balanced through having it's power cost increased and/or it's activation time increased. If the balance issue with that same power was that it's damage scaled up too fast, then it might have it's base damage reduced with an innate damage multiplier to reduce the rate that it scales while leaving the minimum damage alone.
PEter Olotka(the creator of the popular boardgame Cosmic Encounter) has often said that he doesn't try to balance things be making them equal, but by making them gamebreakingly broken in different ways.
AT's are actually good if your just a casual player who pops in now and again. Earning the sets and having a armadillo set mixed with one of the other two (based on your damage type) will also serve you well for this too. By the time you are leveled, you would probably have enough Q saved up from alert dailys to get both sets if you havent already.
But if your serious about teamups for events, cosmics and adventure packs, it would be best to work out a FF and gear them up well. Mercenary set with all 7's will serve you well tbh. but there are better sets to be had for hardcore gamers.
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
It does, but only for the people who have oodles of knowledge, already acquired massive stacks of resources, and who are willing/enthusiastic enough to play awful content like Onslaught in order to get that gear.
That's just not true. Even if it was, all it takes is a quick "Hey guys can I get some tips?" to acquire the oodles. Not really a big climb. I've already proven that gear doesn't make a big different in regards to stuff you can buy off the AH for cheap vs stuff you have to grind for.
Classless systems, despite the name, aren't actually classless. They simply have one single class to which every player belongs. In this way, class is removed as a factor.
Hence why it is referred to as a classless system. It's common sense really. As is the fact that developer intent factors heavily into what "balanced" means for a game. After all, you still haven't identified the source of this "universal balance" you keep claiming exists.
Universal balance where all options have flaws and strengths. Currently the Freeform has no flaws. And the AT has no true advantages it did previously. So they broke it this so called balance or at least this is how I feel about this discussion.
And that applies among ATs. However, because the intent is that FFs both are a bit better than ATs and players can design the strengths and weaknesses of FFs themselves, it means that your concept does not apply between FFs and ATs. See, that's how developer intent shapes what "balanced" means in a game.
The problem with your argument is that it doesn't take any specifics into account, and that's a flaw because not all games are the same. Once you acknowledge the specifics, one of which is developer intent, then you realize that "all options have flaws and strengths" is in fact already being applied to the game - but in a way that makes sense for the game. All options are equal, within their respective areas.
It isn't necessary for ATs to compete with FFs in endgame content. Different abilities and classes excel in different situations, and there's nothing wrong with that, so long as there is content where there is a corresponding advantage.
Well... unfortunately as an AT player you are in competition with other players for roles during team content, and the strong advantages certain FF types have (tanks, esp) over ATs make many of the latter almost redundant. An experienced FF player may take a Tank AT into a Rampage, QZone or Cosmic for the extra challenge or lolz with their buddies but if anyone else tries it they'll either cause a walkout (still very much a thing in PUG content) or get shoved into an "inadequate dps" role and get told they'd be better off playing another character or getting out of the way. So why play that character at all, even if it was fun to level?
That's just not true. Even if it was, all it takes is a quick "Hey guys can I get some tips?" to acquire the oodles. Not really a big climb. I've already proven that gear doesn't make a big different in regards to stuff you can buy off the AH for cheap vs stuff you have to grind for.
It's all marginal gains, and if you add those up you get the Gold while others aren't on the podium. Build potential, the additional range of choices and their synergies with high-end gear make the difference which puts most FF characters out of sight of the average AT; things like the Unleashed's extreme damage are just the occasional quirks of power implementation, not the rule (being polite, there).
With the amount of salt you just vomited up I must have made some really good points I imagine the reason you want the thread closed is because you're losing confidence in your argument. You're right to feel that way.
PS - not stooping to your level cause my argument is sound ^_^
whoa whoa, can't we go back to not trying to take people's heads off? I think the advantage of ATs over FFS is that you can't screw them over basically. it's a simpler way of playing, but comes with the cost of not being as powerful.
whoa whoa, can't we go back to not trying to take people's heads off? I think the advantage of ATs over FFS is that you can't screw them over basically. it's a simpler way of playing, but comes with the cost of not being as powerful.
Yeah, when I first started playing I had no idea how to build FFs.
whoa whoa, can't we go back to not trying to take people's heads off? I think the advantage of ATs over FFS is that you can't screw them over basically. it's a simpler way of playing, but comes with the cost of not being as powerful.
Yeah, when I first started playing I had no idea how to build FFs.
the hero games also accommodates AT's too. So if you wanted to go pvp, that would be the way to go.
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
ATs having access to 14 powers (which is what I think you're saying; correct me if I misinterpreted) wouldn't on its own allow for balance because FFs would still have the innate power of role-switching. To balance that out ATs would either have to be able to role-switch as well or have some AT-specific feature to balance it out. Either solution would work. So, hypothetically, if next patch ATs had 14 powers and role-switching (with all that comes with that), they could claim balance with FFs on the basis that any FF with the same build as an AT wouldn't be able to do more than it could. But, then there would be the problem that if AT PvP ever became a thing again, the ATs would technically have an advantage over FFs with the same build, but then FFs could still claim balance on the basis that they have access to builds ATs don't and do many things that they couldn't...Except that's exactly the situation we were in before this patch, which you claimed wasn't balanced, so we would have to remove AT PvP entirely in such a scenario. No big loss, I suppose.
Balancing through mechanics alone does not necessarily result in homogenization. In fact, it really can't, because some option will always have higher numbers, so trying to balance purely through homogenization would result in a less balanced game. I've pointed this out before.
If grinding for FFs makes them paid content, then so is heroic gear or scr secondaries. That's a silly rationalization, and you know it. XD
Again, I point out that people disagree with developer intent for balance reasons all the time. This is only possible if developer intent is not related to balance.
At no point have I claimed classless games don't exist (I specifically referred to them earlier when talking about how the term is a misnomer). I didn't quote that part because it isn't relevant here; CO has more than one class, and therefore isn't a classless game. I left off the usage example as well because it wasn't relevant. The part that matters is the second one, which is the actual definition.
No, no, it wasn't 1+1=3, it was 1+2=3 for ATs, and 1+1+1=3 for FFs.
"Competing with FFs at endgame content" is not the same as "able to function at endgame content". Of course it's necessary for ATs to function at endgame content, just because the alternative is silly. I think we can all agree with that. XD
Classless systems, despite the name, aren't actually classless. They simply have one single class to which every player belongs. In this way, class is removed as a factor.
Hence why it is referred to as a classless system. It's common sense really. As is the fact that developer intent factors heavily into what "balanced" means for a game. After all, you still haven't identified the source of this "universal balance" you keep claiming exists.
Thank you for finally admitting that FF is a class.
You have yet to support a single argument you have made in this thread, and yet you keep demanding I do so.
Common sense is that developer intent isn't relevant to balance. That's why so many people constantly disagree with the developers on the basis of balance. So, no, balance isn't some magical subjective thing. If it was, balance discussions wouldn't even be possible. They would just be one person complaining, and everyone else saying "working as intended; not a bug", and the thread would be closed. The fact that you yourself have participated in balance discussions in the past with any argument other than "this is what the developers want" proves my point for me.
What is the source of balance? That's easy. Ideally, it would be a situation where everyone is always equally able to contribute. At minimum, it is a situation where everyone has situational advantages over one another, ensuring that everyone always has their chance to shine. See? No intent involved.
ATs having access to 14 powers (which is what I think you're saying; correct me if I misinterpreted) wouldn't on its own allow for balance because FFs would still have the innate power of role-switching. To balance that out ATs would either have to be able to role-switch as well or have some AT-specific feature to balance it out. Either solution would work. So, hypothetically, if next patch ATs had 14 powers and role-switching (with all that comes with that), they could claim balance with FFs on the basis that any FF with the same build as an AT wouldn't be able to do more than it could. But, then there would be the problem that if AT PvP ever became a thing again, the ATs would technically have an advantage over FFs with the same build, but then FFs could still claim balance on the basis that they have access to builds ATs don't and do many things that they couldn't...Except that's exactly the situation we were in before this patch, which you claimed wasn't balanced, so we would have to remove AT PvP entirely in such a scenario. No big loss, I suppose.
Yes, I do mean ATs having access to 14 powers, but it's not simply that. The 2 new powers given to each AT must be chosen properly rather than simply tossing 2 extra powers there way. As I mentioned, most ATs are only missing 1 power type, and that one missing power often creates the gap between ATs and FFs in power level. Additionally, ATs are all missing Ultimates, and with new Ultimates being added as unlocks, they could give all ATs access to an ultimate chosen freely from all unlocked Ultimates. A few examples:
Pretty much every Ranged DPS AT would get a self heal (theme appropriate if possible) The Unleashed could get a lunge An Energy Unlock for the Fist, Impulse, Night Avenger, Devastator, Mountain, Behemoth, Radiant, and Inventor...
With their missing power filled in and free choice of Ultimates, they would be on the exact same power level as well biult FFs. There is no need to give any sort of special AT only bonuses, or even to give them Role switching... However, I wouldnt be opposed to letting all ATs switch roles, even if it was just a simple option of switching to Hybrid and back (Hybrid ATs could swich to a role based on their Passive... the Impulse however poses a unique problem...)
Common sense is that developer intent isn't relevant to balance. That's why so many people constantly disagree with the developers on the basis of balance.
Not quite. Your opinion of what constitutes proper balance may disagree with the dev's but that doesn't mean your opinion is right
Common sense is that developer intent isn't relevant to balance.
Developer intent is not relevant to "is X balanced vs Y". However, developer intent is relevant to "is X supposed to be balanced vs Y". ATs are not balanced vs freeforms. This is not a problem because they aren't supposed to be balanced vs freeforms.
They almost certainly should be, though... (and by that I don't mean "they should all be based on the current meta best build/power wheeze"), just that there's no real reason for a Premium AT to be so lowly compared to a well built FF.
No, not really. ATs should provide an entirely viable taster to the game, with limited utility in the end game (if they're Silver/FTP) or a fully realised, class-based build that you can play anywhere (if they're Premium).#
If they want people to subscribe, then they should avoid making end game content which favours certain character types and builds ("the current meta", pace.), rendering the majority of free-form builds redundant.
ATs should at least feel as though they were created by people who know how to make competent freeform builds and should be able to preform on the same level as FFs who choose the same role. ATs should be an example of what ffs are capable of... although in niche ways.
ATs should at least feel as though they were created by people who know how to make competent freeform builds and should be able to preform on the same level as FFs who choose the same role. ATs should be an example of what ffs are capable of... although in niche ways.
Yup, and luckily, the more recent ATs and AT passes have been moving in that direction.
No, not really. ATs should provide an entirely viable taster to the game, with limited utility in the end game (if they're Silver/FTP) or a fully realised, class-based build that you can play anywhere (if they're Premium).#
All of the ATs, for whom the diminishing returns bug was fixed, have been reviewed and adjusted with player feedback to accomplish this.
If they want people to subscribe, then they should avoid making end game content which favours certain character types and builds ("the current meta", pace.), rendering the majority of free-form builds redundant.
They have been doing a good job of that imo. There are tons of viable builds out there for meaningfully contributing to the completion of endgame content.
If they want people to subscribe, then they should avoid making end game content which favours certain character types and builds ("the current meta", pace.), rendering the majority of free-form builds redundant.
They have been doing a good job of that imo. There are tons of viable builds out there for meaningfully contributing to the completion of endgame content.
They should just get rid of ATs and go back to a subscription only format. I know, I know, F2P and microtransactions are what words these days, but I really hate moochers.
- - - - -
SIGNATURE:
Used to be coach on the forums. Still @coach in game.
If they want people to subscribe, then they should avoid making end game content which favours certain character types and builds ("the current meta", pace.), rendering the majority of free-form builds redundant.
They have been doing a good job of that imo. There are tons of viable builds out there for meaningfully contributing to the completion of endgame content.
They should just do away with F2P ATs altogether and just do FFs for subscribers, like they originally did. But, I know, I know, F2P with microtransactions is the way to go these days, but it is complete BS and should be done away with. You wanna play, you pay. Period.
- - - - -
SIGNATURE:
Used to be coach on the forums. Still @coach in game.
If they want people to subscribe, then they should avoid making end game content which favours certain character types and builds ("the current meta", pace.), rendering the majority of free-form builds redundant.
They have been doing a good job of that imo. There are tons of viable builds out there for meaningfully contributing to the completion of endgame content.
They should just get rid of ATs and go back to a subscription only format. I know, I know, F2P and microtransactions are what words these days, but I really hate moochers.
I agree a billion % with this. Removal of Archtypes should've happened years ago. Hell they never should've been added to begin with. Was a very poorly thought out decision imho.
--------------------------------
Clearer it wasn't, as if was not making them money/the business plan wasn't working out they would have stopped a long time ago.
I used to think that ATs should be removed from the game, but some people recently made some very good fact-based observations about why they're actually good for the game. It was actually a feature that people wanted, and folks in this thread have pointed out why they appreciate the existence of ATs, so it's a good thing they were added. As it turns out the current system is pretty good now that the DR bug is being taken care of. People have their reasons for choosing to play an AT, but now that the DR bug is being removed none of those reasons are the kind of thing that would make someone feel like they have to play an AT for 'competitive' reasons. I'm okay with that.
Still think there should be some faster way to get a FF slot for new players - maybe a discount on the first one they buy on that account?
Take ATs out of the game? God no. I think the majority of the current potential playerbase for this game would happily disregard the flaky, obscure, overcomplicated FF building system for a series of class-based AT builds, capable of competing at endgame, and an infinite amount of character and costume options. Those are fun choices, the rest is a bit dull and very easy to get wrong.
I don't mind not being a FF and being restricted to ATs, as long as they're enough of them for variety, they're good enough to compete with a decent/good FF, still give SOME more choices in their builds, and they have all the archetypes for the heroes I wanna do. like for example WHY don't we have a good telekinetic hero that shoots telekinetic beams, encases/bubbles enemies, levitates stuff? that's like superhero 101. for now they have way too similar ATs while leaving out some that are really needed for some of us.
Yes, I do mean ATs having access to 14 powers, but it's not simply that. The 2 new powers given to each AT must be chosen properly rather than simply tossing 2 extra powers there way. As I mentioned, most ATs are only missing 1 power type, and that one missing power often creates the gap between ATs and FFs in power level. Additionally, ATs are all missing Ultimates, and with new Ultimates being added as unlocks, they could give all ATs access to an ultimate chosen freely from all unlocked Ultimates. A few examples:
With their missing power filled in and free choice of Ultimates, they would be on the exact same power level as well biult FFs. There is no need to give any sort of special AT only bonuses, or even to give them Role switching... However, I wouldnt be opposed to letting all ATs switch roles, even if it was just a simple option of switching to Hybrid and back (Hybrid ATs could swich to a role based on their Passive... the Impulse however poses a unique problem...)
If ATs were to be balanced against FFs without having an AT-specific edge, they would have to have role-switching as an option. It is, in effect, a 15th power that all FFs have, even if they never use it. It may very rarely come in handy, but it's still there. If ATs had that and 14 powers, then no AT-specific edge would be necessary, since there wouldn't be FF-specific edges to compensate for.
That said, there is no need for ATs to be as powerful overall as FFs (I don't even consider such a thing desirable). Even with the DR bug they were still vastly inferior in most respects. But, if it weren't possible for a FF to make the same build as an AT but better, then that would satisfy the minimum requirements for balance, because any FF build that was better overall than a given AT would have to give something up for every gain (even if the trade-off was "worth it"). So, technically, they could just slap on a couple of appropriate powers to each AT, give them role-switching, and then call it a day.
Developer intent is not relevant to "is X balanced vs Y". However, developer intent is relevant to "is X supposed to be balanced vs Y". ATs are not balanced vs freeforms. This is not a problem because they aren't supposed to be balanced vs freeforms.
Putting that aside, however, this is effectively an argument against the concept of balance itself. When I started the game, that was indeed the way the game operated (which is why I never minded in the past). The concept of balance was effectively a joke, and it was treated as such. Now, however, the development team seems to be trying to take balance seriously, so that idea doesn't apply. They can't have it both ways.
This, of course, is not to say that they can't go back to the old way, but it would reframe the changes they've done thus far as being change simply for the sake of change, rather than legitimate balancing.
Common sense is that developer intent isn't relevant to balance. That's why so many people constantly disagree with the developers on the basis of balance.
Not quite. Your opinion of what constitutes proper balance may disagree with the dev's but that doesn't mean your opinion is right
Balance isn't based on opinion. It's based on fact. People may disagree on specific details of it, but that simply means someone (or multiple someones, or even everyone) is incorrect about specific details, due to our limitations in analyzing the game (realistically, no one person is going to be right about all the details). Ideally, you would determine such things mathematically, but in the real world it isn't always so simple (as a basic example, how do you factor in range?). That's why balancing is an iterative process rather than an incremental one.
I don't mind not being a FF and being restricted to ATs, as long as they're enough of them for variety, they're good enough to compete with a decent/good FF, still give SOME more choices in their builds, and they have all the archetypes for the heroes I wanna do. like for example WHY don't we have a good telekinetic hero that shoots telekinetic beams, encases/bubbles enemies, levitates stuff? that's like superhero 101. for now they have way too similar ATs while leaving out some that are really needed for some of us.
Every viable AT has not been made: there is no traditional telekinetic as you pointed out.
That being said, with each powerset pass, a new AT is added. The current AT list is quite long and has many choices and much variety. When the Telekinesis power set is reviewed, expect that TK AT to become available.
Balance isn't based on opinion. It's based on fact. People may disagree on specific details of it, but that simply means someone (or multiple someones, or even everyone) is incorrect about specific details, due to our limitations in analyzing the game (realistically, no one person is going to be right about all the details). Ideally, you would determine such things mathematically, but in the real world it isn't always so simple (as a basic example, how do you factor in range?). That's why balancing is an iterative process rather than an incremental one.
A clarification (since I don't want to risk yet another post getting lost if I hit that edit button):
The question of whether or not a given game state is balanced is a factual one; it either is or it isn't. However, there is often more than one way to get to a balanced state, and people often have different opinions on which balanced state they prefer ("We could nerf A, buff B, or change C; any of them would make the game balanced; but I happen to prefer buffing B"). That doesn't affect whether or not an actual or hypothetical game state is balanced to begin with, however.
Balance isn't based on opinion. It's based on fact. People may disagree on specific details of it, but that simply means someone (or multiple someones, or even everyone) is incorrect about specific details, due to our limitations in analyzing the game (realistically, no one person is going to be right about all the details). Ideally, you would determine such things mathematically, but in the real world it isn't always so simple (as a basic example, how do you factor in range?). That's why balancing is an iterative process rather than an incremental one.
A clarification (since I don't want to risk yet another post getting lost if I hit that edit button):
The question of whether or not a given game state is balanced is a factual one; it either is or it isn't. However, there is often more than one way to get to a balanced state, and people often have different opinions on which balanced state they prefer ("We could nerf A, buff B, or change C; any of them would make the game balanced; but I happen to prefer buffing B"). That doesn't affect whether or not an actual or hypothetical game state is balanced to begin with, however.
You just described developer intent. The game can be balanced in one of three ways, players may think B or C are the right way, but the Developer believes A to be the way to go... ergo Developer Intent.
Comments
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
SIGNATURE:
Used to be coach on the forums. Still @coach in game.
Epic Stronghold
Block timing explained
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
It wouldn't, since the gear which made the DR bug Suddenly Very Urgent And In Need Of A Fix wasn't in the game at the time it was (mostly) written.
CO's intended experience is a beautiful rainbow of diversity! \o/
It is. Generally a good thing, occasionally a problem, since it does allow for those "Stick Swinging Boy vs Galactus" moments generally avoided by sensible comic editors. From my point of view ( where the intended experience is Silver Age comics) then many ATs, run with standard gear, in normal content, hit the spot quite nicely. And that (in relation to the question in the OP) was all I came to say.
Yeah, that's why I'm glad we got the new content that's tuned to provide that experience with current gear.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
Many of us make characters that don't load up on heals, ADs, AOs, or cheese. If we did then all of us Altoholics would be non-existent... there is no fun in repeating the same build a dozen times. me personally, I don't take ADs on my DPS builds and the only time I have 2 ADs is if I'm using PFF as my passive on a tank. Sure I try to include a heal on everyone, but not everyone gets a solid heal, some have far less reliable self-healing options because they fit their theme better.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My characters
I think there should be a clear tier system for the classes.
Free ATs - Should be good enough to do Alerts and contribute to Adventure packs. They should be (primarily) team reliant. Think sidekicks, street heroes, or teen superheros and the like. Participating in Cosmics are only achievable with intense focus and dedication. Think of any team focused comic book hero that if they were on their own, would probably get their butts kicked versus the BIG BAD. Killing mooks is more their thing and they are good at it.
Paid for ATs - Pro heroes, the big leagues, they can contribute to Cosmics just fine, pretty much carry Alerts, and have the tools so solo an Adventure pack if they want too (even though some of those take FOREVER!) These are your heroes that started in a SG but eventually were given their own dedicated or one shot comic book.
Free Forms - (Gimping your build aside.) These are the Planet-Crackers and Paragons of superhero-dom. They should be on the front line and the "Class" everyone aspires to be. These were the Heroes that had their own comic book first, but only sided with a SG for story reasons. With proper knowledge and skill these guys should be able to handle any and all content on their own, with the exception of Cosmics, but they remain the top contributors, end game wise, in whatever role they chose.
Silver AT = Team orientated heroes. Sidekicks. Supporting cast. Would get trashed by the Big Bad on their own. Only stars in a team comic book, is in a bad TV show. Usually part of some trope, might even be color coordinated. Wants to be a break out character, cant get enough fans. Kids still want to be the red one, but you all cant be the red one. Character building is limited to a hand full of either/or choices = Free
Premium AT = Protects the city, does most things solo, teams up versus the big bad. Does get their own solo comic book series from time to time, but mostly known as a leading role in a comic book team. Has had at least 2 successful seasons in a TV show before everything went to crud, then they started teaming up to remain relevant. Character building has a LOT more either/or choices = You pay for it.
Freeform A = Planet-cracker, the flagship superhero. Started with their own comic book, the BAD has to be TOO BIG in order to warrant a team up. Shows up in graphic novels a lot, comic book geeks will know who they are, say they are on par with the mainstream heroes, no one cares. Probably won some obscure award for best written comic no one has read. Has some killer straight to video releases, maybe a "Netvidz Original." Show gets cancelled for not selling merch for some reason, but people love the character regardless. Has the most kickstarters and gofundmes to get thier show put back on the air AGAIN. Companies ignore them. Character building has all choices opened but really not a ton of cosmetic control. = You pay your 50 bucks. Or get lucky and get one for half price or free like I did.
Freeform B = Planet-cracker, the box office superhero. Started with their own comic book, probably has a movie franchise and some other popular merch. Their names are plastered everywhere. Overhyped. Had TV shows, movies, cartoons, flash videos, fanfics, and more. We get sick of seeing their origin stories over and over again. We still buy their t-shirts, posters and all that other junk. Little timmy just got on board the hype train and will claim he knows more about the character than you do because he read this one wiki page. So many cosplay and alternative cosplay, multiverse cosplays and more. Even ends up in the news because of some marketing ploy controversy. The BAD has to be TOO BIG in order to warrant a team up, or if the cash is right and it will push more merch. Character building has all choices opened and full cosmetic control = You pay monthly for it.
How is that job as Trump's Press Secretary panning out, spinny?
Yeah, that's why I'm glad we got the new content that's tuned to provide that experience with current gear.
It does, but only for the people who have oodles of knowledge, already acquired massive stacks of resources, and who are willing/enthusiastic enough to play awful content like Onslaught in order to get that gear. And great if you do - enjoy that content. But otherwise I think the ladder up from levelling content to Cosmics/TA is very, very steep and doesn't have a lot of steps along the way, leading to jumps that are too big for many AT players to make while still remaining fun to play. Hopefully all the work they're doing with queueable Lairs and Crises will make a difference, although it would be nice to have some of the options we have with PvP - AT only queues, for example - or some post 40 measure of power to help make team-building more equal and fun.
It isn't necessary for ATs to compete with FFs in endgame content. Different abilities and classes excel in different situations, and there's nothing wrong with that, so long as there is content where there is a corresponding advantage. As a rough example, if FFs had an inherent +50% damage resistance vs Cosmics and ATs had +50% damage resistance vs Nemeses, that would be acceptable. The numbers wouldn't even need to be the same. At no point have I expressed interest in invalidating anything, though I'm sure you'll try to argue otherwise.
Balance existed in some form before the patch, because both ATs and FFs possessed advantages over each other. In addition, in the long forgotten past back when PvP wasn't dead, ATs had the advantage of being able to enter AT-specific matches. Hypothetically, if ATs were to be given some new AT-specific advantage tomorrow, balance could be re-established, without threatening the overall mechanical dominance of FFs (in much the same way that birds can fly, but that doesn't stop mammals from occupying and dominating many, many more ecological niches than they do). Some claimed FFs cost money. I pointed out that they did not have to. It doesn't affect balance either way.
Classless systems, despite the name, aren't actually classless. They simply have one single class to which every player belongs. In this way, class is removed as a factor. The introduction of ATs didn't introduce classes into the game; it introduced more classes into the game.
FFs can't take any option they want. There are a wide variety of enemy-only abilities that FFs do not have access to, for example. More importantly, FFs have to obey tier requirements and such.
I shouldn't have to support a claim that is common sense (even people on your side of the argument in this thread have referred to FF as a class), but if you insist, let's go look up a definition: [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_class[/url]
[quote]a common method of arbitrating the capabilities of different game characters...A character class aggregates several abilities and aptitudes[/quote]
FF qualifies. But even if you could find some way to change the definition of what a class is to suit your purposes, it wouldn't change the fact that your argument is nonsensical. You are literally arguing that intentional imbalance is balanced. Such a position is absurd, and all you have to support it are red herrings.
Balance is determined by the presence or absence of mechanical advantages. Opinion and developer intent do not enter into it. The very idea that they could is absurd. If opinion mattered in balance, then balance discussions would be impossible. And as for developer intent, well, I've already went over why that's a dishonest argument (people disagree with the developer's intent all the time for balance reasons). Moreover, it's unlikely that the development team would have a unified view of what the game should be to begin with (and even if they did, it can and has changed over time).
The game is less balanced than it was before. That is a fact. You may consider it a positive thing in this particular case, and you are entitled to that opinion. That doesn't have anything to do with what I'm pointing out, though.
The ATs that have had recent balance passes or recently released are closer to well-built FFs, and only because the player base had a direct hand in their development this time around.[/quote]
Actually, it is necessary for ATs to compete with FF in endgame. Is it nessesary for them to have an edge in endgame? No. But it is necessary for them to be able to compete. It is a sign of bad design if you introduce classes to a game that cannot compete in the endgame content of a game.
Giving either side a direct advantage is NOT balance. Balance between ATs and FFs can be achieved by simply giving ATs the full number of available powers, and continuing the trend of allowing the player base to influence the design of new ATs and passes on existing ATs to give them more reliable builds.
Actually, the claims were that FF are paid content. And they are. You either pay for them with cash or you pay for them with time. Either way they have a large investment cost, $20-$40 each or 3-6 months each to buy them outright, and the discounted price even has a time investment of it's own.
Perhaps you should try reading the complete article before making your baseless claims. The very same article you are trying to use to justify your claim also expressly identifies classless games.
Also, lets take a look at the full quote that you truncated: Well the first part is actually unrelated to the definition, it's a mere quantification. The next line is a generalization not a definition. And then the third line that you left off entirely is a usage example. Wikipedia really is a terrible source for definitions.
Developer intent very well does factor into balance. It's not the only factor, but it is a factor. Mechanics can say "this is imbalanced" but it is the developers intent on how a power should function that ultimately determines how said balance is achieved. If you balance purely on mechanics then every thing ends up identical. If a power is intended to be a heavy hitting power with a short or no CD, then it may get balanced through having it's power cost increased and/or it's activation time increased. If the balance issue with that same power was that it's damage scaled up too fast, then it might have it's base damage reduced with an innate damage multiplier to reduce the rate that it scales while leaving the minimum damage alone.
The game is far more balanced than it was before. The DR bug resulted in a situation where 1+1 = 3 if you played an AT. You've made it very clear that you don't actually want balance. You want ATs to have an innate advantage. advantages do not equate balance. The only reason why ATs are not able to be properly balanced to FFs in their current state is because FFs can have more powers. If ATs are given 2 more powers to bring them up to the 14 powers that FFs get then balance can be achieved. With those 2 extra powers they can insure that all ATs have a self heal, a self buff (AO or AD), a block replacer, a lunge (for melee ATs), a threat wipe (for DPS ATs), etc... Most ATs are only missing 1 of those items, and a few are missing 2, but none are missing more than 2.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My characters
But if your serious about teamups for events, cosmics and adventure packs, it would be best to work out a FF and gear them up well. Mercenary set with all 7's will serve you well tbh. but there are better sets to be had for hardcore gamers.
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
Hence why it is referred to as a classless system. It's common sense really. As is the fact that developer intent factors heavily into what "balanced" means for a game. After all, you still haven't identified the source of this "universal balance" you keep claiming exists.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
The problem with your argument is that it doesn't take any specifics into account, and that's a flaw because not all games are the same. Once you acknowledge the specifics, one of which is developer intent, then you realize that "all options have flaws and strengths" is in fact already being applied to the game - but in a way that makes sense for the game. All options are equal, within their respective areas.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
Well... unfortunately as an AT player you are in competition with other players for roles during team content, and the strong advantages certain FF types have (tanks, esp) over ATs make many of the latter almost redundant. An experienced FF player may take a Tank AT into a Rampage, QZone or Cosmic for the extra challenge or lolz with their buddies but if anyone else tries it they'll either cause a walkout (still very much a thing in PUG content) or get shoved into an "inadequate dps" role and get told they'd be better off playing another character or getting out of the way. So why play that character at all, even if it was fun to level?
That's just not true. Even if it was, all it takes is a quick "Hey guys can I get some tips?" to acquire the oodles. Not really a big climb. I've already proven that gear doesn't make a big different in regards to stuff you can buy off the AH for cheap vs stuff you have to grind for.
It's all marginal gains, and if you add those up you get the Gold while others aren't on the podium. Build potential, the additional range of choices and their synergies with high-end gear make the difference which puts most FF characters out of sight of the average AT; things like the Unleashed's extreme damage are just the occasional quirks of power implementation, not the rule (being polite, there).
PARSER USAGE GUIDE: click here for an easy how-to ٩(๑･ิᴗ･ิ)۶٩(･ิᴗ･ิ๑)۶
Spectre beats Eido in an SG run: VIDEO HERE
I imagine the reason you want the thread closed is because you're losing confidence in your argument. You're right to feel that way.
PS - not stooping to your level cause my argument is sound ^_^
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
I think the advantage of ATs over FFS is that you can't screw them over basically. it's a simpler way of playing, but comes with the cost of not being as powerful.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My characters
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
Balancing through mechanics alone does not necessarily result in homogenization. In fact, it really can't, because some option will always have higher numbers, so trying to balance purely through homogenization would result in a less balanced game. I've pointed this out before.
If grinding for FFs makes them paid content, then so is heroic gear or scr secondaries. That's a silly rationalization, and you know it. XD
Again, I point out that people disagree with developer intent for balance reasons all the time. This is only possible if developer intent is not related to balance.
At no point have I claimed classless games don't exist (I specifically referred to them earlier when talking about how the term is a misnomer). I didn't quote that part because it isn't relevant here; CO has more than one class, and therefore isn't a classless game. I left off the usage example as well because it wasn't relevant. The part that matters is the second one, which is the actual definition.
No, no, it wasn't 1+1=3, it was 1+2=3 for ATs, and 1+1+1=3 for FFs.
"Competing with FFs at endgame content" is not the same as "able to function at endgame content". Of course it's necessary for ATs to function at endgame content, just because the alternative is silly. I think we can all agree with that. XD Thank you for finally admitting that FF is a class.
You have yet to support a single argument you have made in this thread, and yet you keep demanding I do so.
Common sense is that developer intent isn't relevant to balance. That's why so many people constantly disagree with the developers on the basis of balance. So, no, balance isn't some magical subjective thing. If it was, balance discussions wouldn't even be possible. They would just be one person complaining, and everyone else saying "working as intended; not a bug", and the thread would be closed. The fact that you yourself have participated in balance discussions in the past with any argument other than "this is what the developers want" proves my point for me.
What is the source of balance? That's easy. Ideally, it would be a situation where everyone is always equally able to contribute. At minimum, it is a situation where everyone has situational advantages over one another, ensuring that everyone always has their chance to shine. See? No intent involved.
Pretty much every Ranged DPS AT would get a self heal (theme appropriate if possible)
The Unleashed could get a lunge
An Energy Unlock for the Fist, Impulse, Night Avenger, Devastator, Mountain, Behemoth, Radiant, and Inventor...
With their missing power filled in and free choice of Ultimates, they would be on the exact same power level as well biult FFs. There is no need to give any sort of special AT only bonuses, or even to give them Role switching... However, I wouldnt be opposed to letting all ATs switch roles, even if it was just a simple option of switching to Hybrid and back (Hybrid ATs could swich to a role based on their Passive... the Impulse however poses a unique problem...)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My characters
Epic Stronghold
Block timing explained
SIGNATURE:
Used to be coach on the forums. Still @coach in game.
If they want people to subscribe, then they should avoid making end game content which favours certain character types and builds ("the current meta", pace.), rendering the majority of free-form builds redundant.
Yup, and luckily, the more recent ATs and AT passes have been moving in that direction.
PARSER USAGE GUIDE: click here for an easy how-to ٩(๑･ิᴗ･ิ)۶٩(･ิᴗ･ิ๑)۶
Spectre beats Eido in an SG run: VIDEO HERE
They should just get rid of ATs and go back to a subscription only format. I know, I know, F2P and microtransactions are what words these days, but I really hate moochers.
SIGNATURE:
Used to be coach on the forums. Still @coach in game.
SIGNATURE:
Used to be coach on the forums. Still @coach in game.
Still think there should be some faster way to get a FF slot for new players - maybe a discount on the first one they buy on that account?
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
like for example WHY don't we have a good telekinetic hero that shoots telekinetic beams, encases/bubbles enemies, levitates stuff? that's like superhero 101.
for now they have way too similar ATs while leaving out some that are really needed for some of us.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
That said, there is no need for ATs to be as powerful overall as FFs (I don't even consider such a thing desirable). Even with the DR bug they were still vastly inferior in most respects. But, if it weren't possible for a FF to make the same build as an AT but better, then that would satisfy the minimum requirements for balance, because any FF build that was better overall than a given AT would have to give something up for every gain (even if the trade-off was "worth it"). So, technically, they could just slap on a couple of appropriate powers to each AT, give them role-switching, and then call it a day. Putting that aside, however, this is effectively an argument against the concept of balance itself. When I started the game, that was indeed the way the game operated (which is why I never minded in the past). The concept of balance was effectively a joke, and it was treated as such. Now, however, the development team seems to be trying to take balance seriously, so that idea doesn't apply. They can't have it both ways.
This, of course, is not to say that they can't go back to the old way, but it would reframe the changes they've done thus far as being change simply for the sake of change, rather than legitimate balancing. Balance isn't based on opinion. It's based on fact. People may disagree on specific details of it, but that simply means someone (or multiple someones, or even everyone) is incorrect about specific details, due to our limitations in analyzing the game (realistically, no one person is going to be right about all the details). Ideally, you would determine such things mathematically, but in the real world it isn't always so simple (as a basic example, how do you factor in range?). That's why balancing is an iterative process rather than an incremental one.
That being said, with each powerset pass, a new AT is added. The current AT list is quite long and has many choices and much variety. When the Telekinesis power set is reviewed, expect that TK AT to become available.
Whoever you are, be that person one hundred percent. Don't compromise on your identity.
The question of whether or not a given game state is balanced is a factual one; it either is or it isn't. However, there is often more than one way to get to a balanced state, and people often have different opinions on which balanced state they prefer ("We could nerf A, buff B, or change C; any of them would make the game balanced; but I happen to prefer buffing B"). That doesn't affect whether or not an actual or hypothetical game state is balanced to begin with, however.
Epic Stronghold
Block timing explained
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My characters
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
You just described developer intent. The game can be balanced in one of three ways, players may think B or C are the right way, but the Developer believes A to be the way to go... ergo Developer Intent.