silverkeltMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,235Arc User
Finally.. boss mechanics.. some are ok, some are sheer stupid.
TELL me 1 other mmo that you could solo any boss .. let alone the mob packs up to the boss.. never.
Orcus should 1 shot a range if there is no tank to take aggro.. simple. simple...simple.
Tanks should have the ability to withstand hits.. heals should have the ability reshape tanks health pools.
reduce crit severity on life steal by 50 or more % of its current value. reduce all health return by 50% (you can keep pots.. they are so limited anyways)
STOP making it so people can just insta heal in combat without healers.. not good.
20% lifesteal if fine.. return of health in small ticks.. OK. but we should be talking about thousands of health return not 100k procs back.
You want things harder? start with this. STOP allowing insta heals with non healing classes..
No not everyone.. if people have 100% crit already due to bonding stones, those people would break out , reduce crit value to add power.
Im trying to reduce the overall power pooling people are accomplishing.
They get 7500 extra power at best (with three stacks of r12 bonding) : \
And it's limited to a few builds/classes. Even now most people do not use brutals because of this. It's cheaper and usually better to use azures.
I am using azures because it is more practical, not because it is better.
If you're less than BiS it's better to use azures though. You're not hitting 100% crit with rank 9 or 10 brutals.
I have R12s and yeah I am far exceeding 100% crit chance, however, if I ever intend to play a GWF or GF, I will want azures for defense slots, not brutals.
Balance the game, but please don't take anything away from us high geared people: It won't work like that. Except if they increase to level 80 and start all over again, but we all know how that idea ended last time...
0
klangeddinMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 882Arc User
Balance the game, but please don't take anything away from us high geared people: It won't work like that. Except if they increase to level 80 and start all over again, but we all know how that idea ended last time...
It's not the idea itself that it's bad, it's how it was carried out that was problematic. Bugged dungeons with super omega mobs + a horrible grinding levelling experience = Worst mod of all time. If mod 6 had released with proper dungeons and the current PTS leveling campaign it would have been a completely different story.
0
silverkeltMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,235Arc User
edited April 2016
This is exactly why I proposed the more LINEAR enchantment system.
IT takes nothing away per se from the VALUE of already ground out items.
It does however, CLOSE the gap between r9s and r12s.. by a pretty significant amount. Which I contend should not be in the form of the non linear equation they have now.
I think this is the best way to shorten the power curve we currently have.
Why is this important? Because of content design.
We need to be able to DESIGN content for a larger range of groups.. the devs have been 100% unwilling to bend to pressure to give anything designed for groups over/or around 2.5k -2.7 maxish.
This leaves a large gap of segmented population that can plow through items.
The linear proposal, shortens the gap between players, allowing for wider range of content delivery to them.
But it doesnt take away any stats in the end.. both end up at the 700.. it just shortens the curve. People can plop on 8 or 9s and be vastly improved to where they are at today.
Stuff is too easy because stats are too high and don't have DR. Increasing stats does nothing to solve that. Player power needs to be reduced or level 80 has to come. There won't be an entire array of new dungeons, skirmishes and raids soon, because obviously the resources for that kinda thing are missing or the company is unwilling to invest in it. So even going to 80 would just mean everything gets up-leveled again which screws over progression completely. I don't think there is any other way for this game to keep content relevant but to just cut of the tip of the pyramid. That doesn't invalidate anyone's grinding either; you would still have better stuff, just not as much better as it is now.
I get you, once you have it all, everythings easy. However, it took (me for instance) a hell of a lot of effort to get that way.
Your solution. Nerf it all into the ground and hey !!! Play the same old content again with a few tweaks but now without all the toys you worked for... Am I supposed to be excited about that..? And the new rewards... what do I spend them on exactly..? More stuff that I won't be able to use..? Logical.
A better solution is the one the forums have been crying for for forever - legendary versions of dungeons, and/or new 3.5k gearlocked content.
Don't take your ennui out on everyone else please.
Silver, giving stats like stamina gain and movespeed (unless it is a % movespeed) is utter HAMSTER. you know how bad the stat curves are on things like stamina gain and most people who have r12s are going to be capped on these stat types already. Also, movespeed as a stat (400:1) is a horrific return that not even 5x darks fixes. Also, bonding stones do not transfer these stats, so having them on a bonding stone is useless... Now, you could fix all of the above but that doesn't mention yet how bad the stamina regen disparity is between classes. TR and DC have very good stamina regen that begins as soon as you use a dodge. GWF and SW have a 2-3 second pause before anything happens even stacking stam regen (in all it's forms) to the hilt. I don't know how stam regen is on other classes but you have a wide range here and it needs to be fixed so it is consistent.
Also, before you go tying anything to whether the pet is in combat or not you had better make sure that the pet AI is more intelligent. You know how much trouble they are.
And Sharp. Your idea that none of these changes would effect pugs and such is wrong. - Any open world content would get vastly harder if buffs only applied in parties since you are not grouped with people to meet at an HE (and you can't invite them to group if you are in combat) so this means it is better to bring DPS only to a HE party, unless you want to start premaking HEs... which is something that the organized and well geared communities would do, and the pugs are still left out. - you did a eCC at 2k ilv back when it was hard. You used more then 3 negative status effects on the boss. You also picked your team and you had people who knew how to play their class aka debuffs and skill interactions that you have now removed with your idea. You forget just how many negative status effects exist in the game. Chill? the damage reduction from various skills. Dots from weapon enchants count. class mechanics. All those red icons on the boss are negative status effects and you want them to be reduced down to the first 3 that are applied. So lesser terror, mark and chill stacks as a random example. Basically your proposal means re-coding most of the skills in the game. So by taking the first 3 applied you introduce an even greater need for communication with your team so that the first 3 effects applied are good ones... and so your options get further limited because you would have to remove weapon enchants so that they are not taking up a valuable slot. - your bonding stacks idea was absurd (150 stacks? that is just asking for everyone to buy a lightfoot thief and other companions that mulitproc), other people toned it down a lot and they made it better. your form though is not a way to level the playing field - your boon idea again is not going level the playing field. As you say, boons provide a substantial amount of power for low geared characters. Limiting boons levels the playing field between high and low, and crushes advancement for the low geared by any other form then getting better gear... 1.5 mil for a r12 is out of their reach, but at least they can farm for a few months and get a few sets of boons
Guild - The Imaginary Friends We are searching for slave labor, will pay with food from our farm!
0
mamalion1234Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,415Arc User
i would like to see FIXES on buffs but not because they are stacking. THEY NEED FIX so they cant buff other class buff. A Buff to increase another buff effectiveness is the broken issue in that case talking about gf into the fray interaction with other buffs. 2nd broken case : buffs increase effectivness on a tree feature watch puppet and murderous flames! LETS go to cw: RENEgades shouldnt stack critical buff uncertain allegiance or we can go 25 renegades ( tiamat) or 10( demogorgon) and clear it with 100% critical rate. YOU can complain against this you will say: but nexus anyway give 30% but the buff is not always nexus!
klangeddinMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 882Arc User
edited April 2016
I can agree that damage multipliers should stack additively and not multiplicatively, if there's buff X that increases party damage by 40% and buff Y that increases party damage by 20% then the total damage should be increased by 60%, not by 68%. The difference may not seem much like this, but with larger numbers (and more buffs) it becomes really relevant.
Regarding buffs and debuffs, I completely agree with @scathias. Limiting both to only three of each has, in my opinion, two inherent problems.
Practically, this would mean the first 3 debuffs to hit a target mob would take priority over any others, both enhancing the "first to the mobs" mentality, and creating redundancies in weapon enchantments. Also, this means without extreme precision and teamwork, your de/buffs would hit in such an unpredictable way that it would lead to wildly erratic results. Secondly, it would require quite a bit of reprogramming on the developer's end (what constitutes a de/buff? Mark/combat advantage/weapon enchantments?), meaning more room for errors, and a mismanagement of resources for the company. They would have to develop a completely new system and, most importantly, make sure it works, and for what? The company gains nothing monetarily from this change. In my opinion, simpler is best, which leads me to:
I can agree that damage multipliers should stack additively and not multiplicatively, if there's buff X that increases party damage by 40% and buff Y that increases party damage by 20% then the total damage should be increased by 60%, not by 68%. The difference may not seem much like this, but with larger numbers (and more buffs) it becomes really relevant.
I could totally get behind this. I'm all for buffs and debuffs, as many as possible. Why? Because building your character and choosing the powers in their rotation to provide more benefits for your team, is what I love best, TEAMWORK. While it's possible to find this elusive quality in the general population, suggesting that de/buffs be limited to 3 mean STRIKERS MUST BE STRIKERS AND STRIKERS ONLY. When I was brand new, I knew my character wasn't bringing dps to the table. So I would build my characters with team buffs in mind, that way I could be as helpful as possible.
But honestly, this multiplicative math has things completely out of control. Additive would be a small change that hopefully could be enacted easily and quickly, and would effect larger groups more dramatically than smaller ones, while also not destroying the ability of lower geared groups with team-oriented playstyles to complete content.
I do look forward to a day where MORE teamwork comes into play via boss mechanics. The damage immunity phase of eGWD makes me hopeful that we will see this one day in the revamped dungeons.
Regarding buffs and debuffs, I completely agree with @scathias. Limiting both to only three of each has, in my opinion, two inherent problems.
Practically, this would mean the first 3 debuffs to hit a target mob would take priority over any others, both enhancing the "first to the mobs" mentality, and creating redundancies in weapon enchantments. Also, this means without extreme precision and teamwork, your de/buffs would hit in such an unpredictable way that it would lead to wildly erratic results. Secondly, it would require quite a bit of reprogramming on the developer's end (what constitutes a de/buff? Mark/combat advantage/weapon enchantments?), meaning more room for errors, and a mismanagement of resources for the company. They would have to develop a completely new system and, most importantly, make sure it works, and for what? The company gains nothing monetarily from this change. In my opinion, simpler is best, which leads me to:
I can agree that damage multipliers should stack additively and not multiplicatively, if there's buff X that increases party damage by 40% and buff Y that increases party damage by 20% then the total damage should be increased by 60%, not by 68%. The difference may not seem much like this, but with larger numbers (and more buffs) it becomes really relevant.
I could totally get behind this. I'm all for buffs and debuffs, as many as possible. Why? Because building your character and choosing the powers in their rotation to provide more benefits for your team, is what I love best, TEAMWORK. While it's possible to find this elusive quality in the general population, suggesting that de/buffs be limited to 3 mean STRIKERS MUST BE STRIKERS AND STRIKERS ONLY. When I was brand new, I knew my character wasn't bringing dps to the table. So I would build my characters with team buffs in mind, that way I could be as helpful as possible.
But honestly, this multiplicative math has things completely out of control. Additive would be a small change that hopefully could be enacted easily and quickly, and would effect larger groups more dramatically than smaller ones, while also not destroying the ability of lower geared groups with team-oriented playstyles to complete content.
I do look forward to a day where MORE teamwork comes into play via boss mechanics. The damage immunity phase of eGWD makes me hopeful that we will see this one day in the revamped dungeons.
When I read your ideas about the buff/ debuff system, this were my thoughts exactly. Furthermore a nerf of this system would reward pure dps over group design in most cases. I like the fact, that you can faceroll most of the game with mediocre gear and a good group design. Brains over brawl.
There should be some changes to the mechanics, for sure, but the basic problem is, that there is a huge power gap between long time players and most of the community. You cant just take things away, without losing many of your players. You cant reward everyone with BIS gear in a month or most ppl would stop playing after this month. It is a fact, that there are different geared players and there should be dungeons addressed to each group.
Now we could begin the endless discussion, if more difficult dungeons should give more reward. One side claiming, that players who beat it dont need rewards and the other side arguing, that more risk and more time spent should give better rewards.
IMO there should be a dungeon, that requires high end gear and a near perfect party composition, to succeed, so high geared players are occupied and the rest has something to work toward. If you are afraid, that the riches get richer, make most of the reward BOA. The problem with this concept would be, that a) the developers would need great insight into the mechanics (I dont think so) and b) either some classes would be excluded or it would be to easy for some parties bc of the current disparity between classes.
The best solution would be a bunch of new dungeons with different difficulties and mechanics, so one class could shine in one and the other in the other dungeon while different tiers make it a challenge for beginners and BIS players alike, but I dont think, that this will happen.
I fully agree with @klangeddin and @thestia that changing buffs from multiplicative to additive stacking would be a good way to tone them down a little. The problem I have with the original idea of only a certain number of buffs and debuffs applying is that it will essentially kill all the pure support builds, because you will anyway not be able to take full advantage of them. So everyone will have to go for dps in the end, and I think it's really not helpful to reduce the number of viable builds. I totally agree that some buffs, and some combinations of those are very very strong. However it needs to be kept in mind that if I run a pure buff/debuff build, I sacrifice everything else for it: damage, heals, tankiness. So if my buffs can't make up for those "lost" attributes, there is no point in having me in a party.
Personally, what I'd like to see in the game is a greater dependency on buffs and class interactions in order to complete end-game content. This is meant to be a team game after all, at least as far as endgame is considered. For example as a DC myself I really like the different interactions with the tank classes. Depending on which tank class I run with I will slot different encounter powers to make the most out of my buffs and this makes the game a whole lot more interesting to me. I would really like it if there were more interactions like this, even though I can imagine that it's a pain to balance those. Still, whenever you mix up your rotation or try something new, the game gets more interesting, at least in my book.
The part of depending on buffs of course requires content to be harder. Still, I don't believe that an average, casual player actually wants harder dungeons and if general difficulty is increased those players won't like it. Which brings me to the old suggestion that we need harder dungeons. To me it wouldn't even have to be "new" dungeons, I would also be fine with something like the Diablo system where you can chose at what difficulty you want to run your content. "Simply" (I'm absolutely no IT person and don't know if something like this is really simple) adding 3 tears of difficulty on top of the existing one, each adding 20% (?) to monster damage, HP and damage resistance would totally do the job. Ofc rewards have to be adjusted as well, like increasing the chances at good loot by 2% for each step or something like this.
I like the changes to the bonding runestones that you propose, though one thing that I would add is that stacks of companion's gift should drop immediately if your pet dies. It just doesn't make sense that you would get a benefit from a dead companion. The changes to boons I don't like so much, mainly because they take away the easiest way for casual players to power up their characters.
0
darkstarcrashMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,382Arc User
I admire @thefabricant for his thinking on this subject, but it's clear his thoughts are based on his experience as a high-level CW who owns HV and runs in pre-made groups of players with every buff known to mankind. Which is fine, we all have our biases. So I'll state that I run multiple characters -- the better-geared ones are around 3.1k ilvl, with rank 9 and 10 enchantments, a couple are at ~2.7k ilvl in mostly rank 7s and no artifact equipment upgraded to legendary. So I'm arguing from the point of view of the more typical player.
1. Bonding Stones
Yes, right now summoned companions with perfect+ bonding runestones clearly outperform augments. Your proposed system is way too complicated and Cryptic would never take the time to program it, and it continues to favor a limited number of fast-attacking/AoE companions. Maybe just a hard cap of 150%?
2. Boons
This is where your prejudices as a high-level player are most obvious.
A 2.5k character has 6 fewer non-utility slots than a 3.5k player with all legendary artifact equipment and +4 rings. Assuming they slot azures for defense (and comparing rank 7 to rank 12s), the 2.5k player has 460 defense from enchantments while the 3.5k player has 4200 defense from enchantments. And this is ignoring additional stats from companions and legendary belts.
It's obvious that a couple boons of +400 defense aren't where all the power creep is coming from.
I agree with @silverkelt that enchantment values should be linearized, and I'd argue that the slope could be flattened, so that rank 12 gives 550 or 600 points.
Don't make it useless to complete more than 2 campaigns -- and let's face it, that would be totally counter-productive to keeping people active in the game, so why would Cryptic be interested in your "fix"?
3. Buff/Debuff Stacking
Yes, a premade group with tons of buffs/debuffs, including legacy gear with game-breaking set bonuses, will run through content with ease, as you have proven many times with your videos of 12-second Orcus kills.
But your proposed solution would make every minmax group spend 10 minutes plotting out who could use which spell/equipment/feat/enchantment to maximize boss fight efficiency -- while the typical pug would wonder why their boss fights take so long, because the first 3 debuffs happened to all be -movement speed.
Start with making buffs and debuffs additive rather than multiplicative, and then if that doesn't tone things down enough, let's try hard caps.
PROS: Based off of DND making me interested in playing it.
CONS: MMO Model is terrible and outdated by 7 years.
The massive multiplayer model for online games has to change, it's the reason you have a handful of a thousand players instead of hundreds of thousands. There is nothing fun about the "endless questing" or the "questing grind" model as I like to call it. It's found in every MMO everywhere (yes neverwinter has done it very well compared to others) but a bad idea is still a bad idea no matter how well it is implemented.
This type of model results in two outcomes: 1. Players play solo and, 2. It has a linear progression.
By the time I am level 70, orcs will still be in neverwinter tower district for other level 15 players to battle. This is not my idea of game immersion. In fact it is not immersion at all. It ruins the game for me when countless hundreds of players have done the same quests over and over, and when nothing in the game world actually changes.
If you want to improve the gaming experience, you have to start by slowly changing the game world into an experience that is completely random, and fresh every time.
1. Quests have to be completed and never seen again (as in erased from the game world). So a player creation quest system is vital of course. 2. Quests have to randomly be generated and pop up in the game world. 3. Quests must never be generic despite this, that means tons of creativity is required as well as a good algorithm. 4. Quests can't be given or found by constantly searching for a NPC with an exclamation above their head. Instead no one knows where to find a quest, because daily it changes, quests are more like gifts or surprises. 5. The game-world has to be alterable. That means if I wipe monsters out of a dungeon, that dungeon stays empty. 6. Because of the above the world has to be more of a sandbox. If a giant dungeon is a cave, I can walk into it and transition to the next area (the dungeon) without knowing. 7. Even if a dungeon is cleared monsters, evil characters or other things can come back. Just they don't spawn every time you enter. It's more like they have their daily movements across the game world also. 8. One way quests are given is through my own thought process. If I find a relic in a dungeon, I have to choose between thought bubbles, and depending on the thought bubbles I choose, I will end up on a quest because I decided this will be a quest for me. If it's a religious relic then being a paladin i might know lore about it, and end up on the quest to return the item to my diety. If I am a thief i might try to sell it and learn more about it that way, with the end result of selling it etc. If I am a barbarian I might just wear the item and be cursed and end up on a totally different quest altogether. 9. Because the world will be this way, and not built for an ADHD generation of players.. with so much going on everywhere so people don't get bored (which actually harms player base even though you think your hooking customers). There will be a greater reliance on the main aspect of what an MMO is: Player Interaction (Honestly it seems with the current MMO models, they are only multiplayer so people can trade and sell items). As such a party system would be in place as follows: If players are near me, that are near my level, suddenly they turn green, and are in a party with me. If they are not near my level this doesn't happen. If they don't want to be partied they can run away. There will be an option to disable the feature, as well as to make parties permanent until someone selects to leave, if they opt out of conditional party (run away) mode. But this automatically ensures player interaction and every quest being with other players. I'm at the mouth of a dungeon, 3 players my level walk up within 20 feet, we are all auto in a party just from the proximity, like an AURA effect. "Oh hail friends, lets go in this dungeon".. and we go, nothing else needs to be done. 10. Dungeons and mobs need to scale (to a point) based on party size. I just did Cloak tower, and someone soloed it because he ran faster than all of us, and before we could get to the bosses (he had a 5 second head start) they were all dead, and he was 3 levels lower than me. This is ridiculously stupid. And the sad thing is if i could run faster i could solo everything too. ZERO challenge. 11. Talking about point 10, instant gratification game model has to go. Every mob, every monster, everything that wants to hurt you has to bring a sense of dread. Not bring instant gratification. Slowly, by the time you are level 70, you have SOME, a tiny small bit, of gratification, because you can kill most creatures alone. But many others, dragons, beholders, demons, and the like, you could never hope to solo, ever. 12. An MMO must always focus on player interaction and the immersion of myself in the world with my character in the game. As such when i push enter, any and all text i type should immediately appear above my head. It should be that simple. If text is confined to a small chat box in the corner that i have to activate and then select where i am talking, and then the screen fades out because i switched to mouse mode etc. it already ruined immersion, and makes roleplaying not as good at all. Now a chat box must exist, for server talk, and trade chat, but for Roleplaying, for me being linked to my character, it has to be as simple as enter, and type. No fade outs, no mouse modes, no nothing, just text appearing above my head.
There are many more ideas that could be said, but these are the main points about the MMO model. No MMO will be a success if it's based on instant gratification, or grinding in any form. Challenging mobs don't mean grinding (in fact they mean be careful and find a friend), since XP wont be gained from killing mobs, primarily it will be from quests still. But quests will actually be dynamic and new, day by day, and never would they feel generic.
0
onegaki101Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 327Arc User
Limiting buff/debuff would mean less support classes and more dps classes in groups as there wouldn't be a point in bringing more than 1 or 2.
Better game mechanics would make dungeons more interesting as current dungeons are all simply tank and spank. You don't even need best gear or high gear, just the right group composition. However, there really isn't any point in attempting to add better game mechanics when items and spells are not working as expected. If they don't even bother to test these simple items, how are we going to expect them to design an entirely new game mechanic?
Adding refined AD to an end of a dungeon is very bad. This will give simply create a bigger divide between haves and have nots.
One of the things they should attempt to do is bring random generated maps to the dungeons with random generated monsters. The point of running dungeons shouldn't just be about the gear, because once you get the gear, you do not want to do it again. However, if making the dungeons fun to run. You have endless replay ability. Making dungeons have different layout would make it more interesting since you are not on auto pilot moving from A to B. Different layout would include traps that makes the player fall to their death. Randomly generating different packs with potentially vary in difficulty would make dungeons more interesting as well. Could be packs with a leader that provides a buff or shield to allies until they are killed or packs that have to be killed within 10 seconds of each other or they revive.
Just simply creating a brand new dungeon or bringing back old ones will be pointless because once people beat it once or 5 times, they will be bored and are always on auto pilot. So being able to generate different versions of the same make will be a much greater investment in resources as there is a lot more replay-ability than simply creating/introducing back a dungeon. This will create more enjoyment for the group that enjoys doing dungeons as a party rather than for the loot. This also will prevent people that constantly farm the dungeons for gear from going auto pilot as map/enemy group composition changes. There nothing to do about those that always want new dungeon and gear because they will be bored after doing it once and/or getting the new gear, then complain that they want new ones again.
I support OP's suggestion. But, you also need to address old armor sets taking them out completely. I love KC and HP as much as the next guy, but it does present a problem in that it is too powerful and new players can no longer get them. Another option could be to just nerf old sets a little while making them attainable again.
We can still completely crush lostmauth even with all DPS at 2.5k ilvl as long as we have GF and DC with HP set.
"As the good archmage often admonishes me, I ought not to let my mind wander, as it's too small to go off by itself." -Danilo Thann[/quote]
I don't know I'm hearing that the game is way too easy levels 1-40 or something, and then it becomes way too hard level 40-70. If that's the case there needs to be some serious rebalancing done. Honestly if you ask players from 1-30 if they died even once, I bet all 3000 would say no in a poll. This is kind of hilarious and sad at the same time. A game is not meant to be this easy. Check out my review for Neverwinter on steam. I really want to love this game, since I really love DND, but I've played many great DND games, and even better MMOs, and this game needs some work. Three people in a dungeon is completely useless, when ANY one of us can solo that dungeon.. sigh.
I don't know I'm hearing that the game is way too easy levels 1-40 or something, and then it becomes way too hard level 40-70. If that's the case there needs to be some serious rebalancing done. Honestly if you ask players from 1-30 if they died even once, I bet all 3000 would say no in a poll. This is kind of hilarious and sad at the same time. A game is not meant to be this easy. Check out my review for Neverwinter on steam. I really want to love this game, since I really love DND, but I've played many great DND games, and even better MMOs, and this game needs some work. Three people in a dungeon is completely useless, when ANY one of us can solo that dungeon.. sigh.
Based on your review I would say that you may not have played long enough. You basically wrote your whole review about 1% of the entire game. Though if you probably played the rest of the 99% you'd probably have an even worse opinion about the game.
"As the good archmage often admonishes me, I ought not to let my mind wander, as it's too small to go off by itself." -Danilo Thann[/quote]
0
demonmongerMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,350Arc User
All they have to do is set the max allowed bonus you can obtain from companions
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I hate paying taxes! Why must I pay thousands of dollars in taxes when everything I buy is taxed anyways!
0
thefabricantMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 5,248Arc User
Now that we have the boons from mod 9 in addition to the boons from the elemental evil campaign, as well as all the new gear, it becomes increasingly evident, even after the elol set nerf, that it will take drastic changes in order to bring some challenge back into the game.
Comments
TELL me 1 other mmo that you could solo any boss .. let alone the mob packs up to the boss.. never.
Orcus should 1 shot a range if there is no tank to take aggro.. simple. simple...simple.
Tanks should have the ability to withstand hits.. heals should have the ability reshape tanks health pools.
reduce crit severity on life steal by 50 or more % of its current value.
reduce all health return by 50% (you can keep pots.. they are so limited anyways)
STOP making it so people can just insta heal in combat without healers.. not good.
20% lifesteal if fine.. return of health in small ticks.. OK. but we should be talking about thousands of health return not 100k procs back.
You want things harder? start with this. STOP allowing insta heals with non healing classes..
make it so you need some health return.
If you're less than BiS it's better to use azures though. You're not hitting 100% crit with rank 9 or 10 brutals.
Bugged dungeons with super omega mobs + a horrible grinding levelling experience = Worst mod of all time.
If mod 6 had released with proper dungeons and the current PTS leveling campaign it would have been a completely different story.
IT takes nothing away per se from the VALUE of already ground out items.
It does however, CLOSE the gap between r9s and r12s.. by a pretty significant amount. Which I contend should not be in the form of the non linear equation they have now.
I think this is the best way to shorten the power curve we currently have.
Why is this important? Because of content design.
We need to be able to DESIGN content for a larger range of groups.. the devs have been 100% unwilling to bend to pressure to give anything designed for groups over/or around 2.5k -2.7 maxish.
This leaves a large gap of segmented population that can plow through items.
The linear proposal, shortens the gap between players, allowing for wider range of content delivery to them.
But it doesnt take away any stats in the end.. both end up at the 700.. it just shortens the curve. People can plop on 8 or 9s and be vastly improved to where they are at today.
I don't think there is any other way for this game to keep content relevant but to just cut of the tip of the pyramid. That doesn't invalidate anyone's grinding either; you would still have better stuff, just not as much better as it is now.
Your solution. Nerf it all into the ground and hey !!! Play the same old content again with a few tweaks but now without all the toys you worked for... Am I supposed to be excited about that..? And the new rewards... what do I spend them on exactly..? More stuff that I won't be able to use..? Logical.
A better solution is the one the forums have been crying for for forever - legendary versions of dungeons, and/or new 3.5k gearlocked content.
Don't take your ennui out on everyone else please.
Now, you could fix all of the above but that doesn't mention yet how bad the stamina regen disparity is between classes. TR and DC have very good stamina regen that begins as soon as you use a dodge. GWF and SW have a 2-3 second pause before anything happens even stacking stam regen (in all it's forms) to the hilt. I don't know how stam regen is on other classes but you have a wide range here and it needs to be fixed so it is consistent.
Also, before you go tying anything to whether the pet is in combat or not you had better make sure that the pet AI is more intelligent. You know how much trouble they are.
And Sharp.
Your idea that none of these changes would effect pugs and such is wrong.
- Any open world content would get vastly harder if buffs only applied in parties since you are not grouped with people to meet at an HE (and you can't invite them to group if you are in combat) so this means it is better to bring DPS only to a HE party, unless you want to start premaking HEs... which is something that the organized and well geared communities would do, and the pugs are still left out.
- you did a eCC at 2k ilv back when it was hard. You used more then 3 negative status effects on the boss. You also picked your team and you had people who knew how to play their class aka debuffs and skill interactions that you have now removed with your idea. You forget just how many negative status effects exist in the game. Chill? the damage reduction from various skills. Dots from weapon enchants count. class mechanics. All those red icons on the boss are negative status effects and you want them to be reduced down to the first 3 that are applied. So lesser terror, mark and chill stacks as a random example. Basically your proposal means re-coding most of the skills in the game. So by taking the first 3 applied you introduce an even greater need for communication with your team so that the first 3 effects applied are good ones... and so your options get further limited because you would have to remove weapon enchants so that they are not taking up a valuable slot.
- your bonding stacks idea was absurd (150 stacks? that is just asking for everyone to buy a lightfoot thief and other companions that mulitproc), other people toned it down a lot and they made it better. your form though is not a way to level the playing field
- your boon idea again is not going level the playing field. As you say, boons provide a substantial amount of power for low geared characters. Limiting boons levels the playing field between high and low, and crushes advancement for the low geared by any other form then getting better gear... 1.5 mil for a r12 is out of their reach, but at least they can farm for a few months and get a few sets of boons
We are searching for slave labor, will pay with food from our farm!
2nd broken case : buffs increase effectivness on a tree feature watch puppet and murderous flames!
LETS go to cw: RENEgades shouldnt stack critical buff uncertain allegiance or we can go 25 renegades ( tiamat) or 10( demogorgon) and clear it with 100% critical rate. YOU can complain against this you will say: but nexus anyway give 30% but the buff is not always nexus!
Practically, this would mean the first 3 debuffs to hit a target mob would take priority over any others, both enhancing the "first to the mobs" mentality, and creating redundancies in weapon enchantments. Also, this means without extreme precision and teamwork, your de/buffs would hit in such an unpredictable way that it would lead to wildly erratic results. Secondly, it would require quite a bit of reprogramming on the developer's end (what constitutes a de/buff? Mark/combat advantage/weapon enchantments?), meaning more room for errors, and a mismanagement of resources for the company. They would have to develop a completely new system and, most importantly, make sure it works, and for what? The company gains nothing monetarily from this change. In my opinion, simpler is best, which leads me to: I could totally get behind this. I'm all for buffs and debuffs, as many as possible. Why? Because building your character and choosing the powers in their rotation to provide more benefits for your team, is what I love best, TEAMWORK. While it's possible to find this elusive quality in the general population, suggesting that de/buffs be limited to 3 mean STRIKERS MUST BE STRIKERS AND STRIKERS ONLY. When I was brand new, I knew my character wasn't bringing dps to the table. So I would build my characters with team buffs in mind, that way I could be as helpful as possible.
But honestly, this multiplicative math has things completely out of control. Additive would be a small change that hopefully could be enacted easily and quickly, and would effect larger groups more dramatically than smaller ones, while also not destroying the ability of lower geared groups with team-oriented playstyles to complete content.
I do look forward to a day where MORE teamwork comes into play via boss mechanics. The damage immunity phase of eGWD makes me hopeful that we will see this one day in the revamped dungeons.
There should be some changes to the mechanics, for sure, but the basic problem is, that there is a huge power gap between long time players and most of the community. You cant just take things away, without losing many of your players. You cant reward everyone with BIS gear in a month or most ppl would stop playing after this month. It is a fact, that there are different geared players and there should be dungeons addressed to each group.
Now we could begin the endless discussion, if more difficult dungeons should give more reward. One side claiming, that players who beat it dont need rewards and the other side arguing, that more risk and more time spent should give better rewards.
IMO there should be a dungeon, that requires high end gear and a near perfect party composition, to succeed, so high geared players are occupied and the rest has something to work toward. If you are afraid, that the riches get richer, make most of the reward BOA. The problem with this concept would be, that a) the developers would need great insight into the mechanics (I dont think so) and b) either some classes would be excluded or it would be to easy for some parties bc of the current disparity between classes.
The best solution would be a bunch of new dungeons with different difficulties and mechanics, so one class could shine in one and the other in the other dungeon while different tiers make it a challenge for beginners and BIS players alike, but I dont think, that this will happen.
Personally, what I'd like to see in the game is a greater dependency on buffs and class interactions in order to complete end-game content. This is meant to be a team game after all, at least as far as endgame is considered. For example as a DC myself I really like the different interactions with the tank classes. Depending on which tank class I run with I will slot different encounter powers to make the most out of my buffs and this makes the game a whole lot more interesting to me. I would really like it if there were more interactions like this, even though I can imagine that it's a pain to balance those. Still, whenever you mix up your rotation or try something new, the game gets more interesting, at least in my book.
The part of depending on buffs of course requires content to be harder. Still, I don't believe that an average, casual player actually wants harder dungeons and if general difficulty is increased those players won't like it. Which brings me to the old suggestion that we need harder dungeons. To me it wouldn't even have to be "new" dungeons, I would also be fine with something like the Diablo system where you can chose at what difficulty you want to run your content. "Simply" (I'm absolutely no IT person and don't know if something like this is really simple) adding 3 tears of difficulty on top of the existing one, each adding 20% (?) to monster damage, HP and damage resistance would totally do the job. Ofc rewards have to be adjusted as well, like increasing the chances at good loot by 2% for each step or something like this.
I like the changes to the bonding runestones that you propose, though one thing that I would add is that stacks of companion's gift should drop immediately if your pet dies. It just doesn't make sense that you would get a benefit from a dead companion. The changes to boons I don't like so much, mainly because they take away the easiest way for casual players to power up their characters.
1. Bonding Stones
Yes, right now summoned companions with perfect+ bonding runestones clearly outperform augments. Your proposed system is way too complicated and Cryptic would never take the time to program it, and it continues to favor a limited number of fast-attacking/AoE companions. Maybe just a hard cap of 150%?
2. Boons
This is where your prejudices as a high-level player are most obvious.
A 2.5k character has 6 fewer non-utility slots than a 3.5k player with all legendary artifact equipment and +4 rings. Assuming they slot azures for defense (and comparing rank 7 to rank 12s), the 2.5k player has 460 defense from enchantments while the 3.5k player has 4200 defense from enchantments. And this is ignoring additional stats from companions and legendary belts.
It's obvious that a couple boons of +400 defense aren't where all the power creep is coming from.
I agree with @silverkelt that enchantment values should be linearized, and I'd argue that the slope could be flattened, so that rank 12 gives 550 or 600 points.
Don't make it useless to complete more than 2 campaigns -- and let's face it, that would be totally counter-productive to keeping people active in the game, so why would Cryptic be interested in your "fix"?
3. Buff/Debuff Stacking
Yes, a premade group with tons of buffs/debuffs, including legacy gear with game-breaking set bonuses, will run through content with ease, as you have proven many times with your videos of 12-second Orcus kills.
But your proposed solution would make every minmax group spend 10 minutes plotting out who could use which spell/equipment/feat/enchantment to maximize boss fight efficiency -- while the typical pug would wonder why their boss fights take so long, because the first 3 debuffs happened to all be -movement speed.
Start with making buffs and debuffs additive rather than multiplicative, and then if that doesn't tone things down enough, let's try hard caps.
Based off of DND making me interested in playing it.
CONS:
MMO Model is terrible and outdated by 7 years.
The massive multiplayer model for online games has to change, it's the reason you have a handful of a thousand players instead of hundreds of thousands. There is nothing fun about the "endless questing" or the "questing grind" model as I like to call it. It's found in every MMO everywhere (yes neverwinter has done it very well compared to others) but a bad idea is still a bad idea no matter how well it is implemented.
This type of model results in two outcomes:
1. Players play solo and,
2. It has a linear progression.
By the time I am level 70, orcs will still be in neverwinter tower district for other level 15 players to battle. This is not my idea of game immersion. In fact it is not immersion at all. It ruins the game for me when countless hundreds of players have done the same quests over and over, and when nothing in the game world actually changes.
If you want to improve the gaming experience, you have to start by slowly changing the game world into an experience that is completely random, and fresh every time.
1. Quests have to be completed and never seen again (as in erased from the game world). So a player creation quest system is vital of course.
2. Quests have to randomly be generated and pop up in the game world.
3. Quests must never be generic despite this, that means tons of creativity is required as well as a good algorithm.
4. Quests can't be given or found by constantly searching for a NPC with an exclamation above their head. Instead no one knows where to find a quest, because daily it changes, quests are more like gifts or surprises.
5. The game-world has to be alterable. That means if I wipe monsters out of a dungeon, that dungeon stays empty.
6. Because of the above the world has to be more of a sandbox. If a giant dungeon is a cave, I can walk into it and transition to the next area (the dungeon) without knowing.
7. Even if a dungeon is cleared monsters, evil characters or other things can come back. Just they don't spawn every time you enter. It's more like they have their daily movements across the game world also.
8. One way quests are given is through my own thought process. If I find a relic in a dungeon, I have to choose between thought bubbles, and depending on the thought bubbles I choose, I will end up on a quest because I decided this will be a quest for me. If it's a religious relic then being a paladin i might know lore about it, and end up on the quest to return the item to my diety. If I am a thief i might try to sell it and learn more about it that way, with the end result of selling it etc. If I am a barbarian I might just wear the item and be cursed and end up on a totally different quest altogether.
9. Because the world will be this way, and not built for an ADHD generation of players.. with so much going on everywhere so people don't get bored (which actually harms player base even though you think your hooking customers). There will be a greater reliance on the main aspect of what an MMO is: Player Interaction (Honestly it seems with the current MMO models, they are only multiplayer so people can trade and sell items). As such a party system would be in place as follows: If players are near me, that are near my level, suddenly they turn green, and are in a party with me. If they are not near my level this doesn't happen. If they don't want to be partied they can run away. There will be an option to disable the feature, as well as to make parties permanent until someone selects to leave, if they opt out of conditional party (run away) mode. But this automatically ensures player interaction and every quest being with other players. I'm at the mouth of a dungeon, 3 players my level walk up within 20 feet, we are all auto in a party just from the proximity, like an AURA effect. "Oh hail friends, lets go in this dungeon".. and we go, nothing else needs to be done.
10. Dungeons and mobs need to scale (to a point) based on party size. I just did Cloak tower, and someone soloed it because he ran faster than all of us, and before we could get to the bosses (he had a 5 second head start) they were all dead, and he was 3 levels lower than me. This is ridiculously stupid. And the sad thing is if i could run faster i could solo everything too. ZERO challenge.
11. Talking about point 10, instant gratification game model has to go. Every mob, every monster, everything that wants to hurt you has to bring a sense of dread. Not bring instant gratification. Slowly, by the time you are level 70, you have SOME, a tiny small bit, of gratification, because you can kill most creatures alone. But many others, dragons, beholders, demons, and the like, you could never hope to solo, ever.
12. An MMO must always focus on player interaction and the immersion of myself in the world with my character in the game. As such when i push enter, any and all text i type should immediately appear above my head. It should be that simple. If text is confined to a small chat box in the corner that i have to activate and then select where i am talking, and then the screen fades out because i switched to mouse mode etc. it already ruined immersion, and makes roleplaying not as good at all. Now a chat box must exist, for server talk, and trade chat, but for Roleplaying, for me being linked to my character, it has to be as simple as enter, and type. No fade outs, no mouse modes, no nothing, just text appearing above my head.
There are many more ideas that could be said, but these are the main points about the MMO model. No MMO will be a success if it's based on instant gratification, or grinding in any form. Challenging mobs don't mean grinding (in fact they mean be careful and find a friend), since XP wont be gained from killing mobs, primarily it will be from quests still. But quests will actually be dynamic and new, day by day, and never would they feel generic.
Better game mechanics would make dungeons more interesting as current dungeons are all simply tank and spank. You don't even need best gear or high gear, just the right group composition. However, there really isn't any point in attempting to add better game mechanics when items and spells are not working as expected. If they don't even bother to test these simple items, how are we going to expect them to design an entirely new game mechanic?
Adding refined AD to an end of a dungeon is very bad. This will give simply create a bigger divide between haves and have nots.
One of the things they should attempt to do is bring random generated maps to the dungeons with random generated monsters. The point of running dungeons shouldn't just be about the gear, because once you get the gear, you do not want to do it again. However, if making the dungeons fun to run. You have endless replay ability. Making dungeons have different layout would make it more interesting since you are not on auto pilot moving from A to B. Different layout would include traps that makes the player fall to their death.
Randomly generating different packs with potentially vary in difficulty would make dungeons more interesting as well. Could be packs with a leader that provides a buff or shield to allies until they are killed or packs that have to be killed within 10 seconds of each other or they revive.
Just simply creating a brand new dungeon or bringing back old ones will be pointless because once people beat it once or 5 times, they will be bored and are always on auto pilot. So being able to generate different versions of the same make will be a much greater investment in resources as there is a lot more replay-ability than simply creating/introducing back a dungeon.
This will create more enjoyment for the group that enjoys doing dungeons as a party rather than for the loot.
This also will prevent people that constantly farm the dungeons for gear from going auto pilot as map/enemy group composition changes.
There nothing to do about those that always want new dungeon and gear because they will be bored after doing it once and/or getting the new gear, then complain that they want new ones again.
We can still completely crush lostmauth even with all DPS at 2.5k ilvl as long as we have GF and DC with HP set.
steamcommunity.com/id/Valourant/recommended/109600/