| Username | UnSub |
| Real Name | Huw Hepworth |
| Rank | Hard Core Member |
| Joined | October 16, 2004 |
| Gender | Male |
| Age | 31 |
| Location | Perth, Australia |
| Last Visit | December 1, 2008 |
| Post Count | 108 |
| Biography | |
| Quote |
Issue 13 (named "Power and Responsibility") for City of Heroes / Villains is on its way and will probably go live in the next two weeks. It's an interesting issue for a number of reasons - some of the new content is interesting, like Day Jobs - but mostly because I13 tries to fix a number of systems within CoH/V that weren't working particularly well - the Epic Power Pools (for both sides) and PvP.
After a ton of data mining, a new dev revealed the plans behind fixing up the Epic Power Pools powers by removing those powers few people took and replacing them with new powers that were seen as being more useful. Overpowered EPPs were nerfed (and there were some must have EPPs because they were so good, so this move was hardly unreasonable). Of course, outrage ensued, people hated having powers taken away from them or having their powers nerfed, DOOOOOOOM abounded and the devs have gone back a little bit and left in the powers that already existed in the EPPs, so that there are more options in the EPPs at I13. I haven't kept track of the nerfs, but it is unlikely that there will be too many roll backs of them.
Given that the EPPs on both sides had their under- and over-performing stars, they did need attention. Complaints about them have existed pretty much since launch. However it was interesting to see that every niche, every under-used EPP had its defenders willing to crash the boards and demand that the changes not occur because they might impact on a very small proportion of the player base even though they could benefit a much larger group.
Which, conveniently, leads us to the PvP changes. PvP in CoH has been a long running joke - the standard reply to pretty much any comment about PvP outside of the PvP forums is "lol PvP". Some Archetypes are relentlessly better in CoH/V PvP than others and the most common experiences players have on entering PvP zones is getting two-shotted by a Stalker (stealth class with massive burst damage, especially at lower levels) or getting steamrolled by a team on the other side. One of the appeals of CoH/V's PvP is its speed - travel powers make it incredibly easy to zip in and fire an attack (from range, preferably) before the target even knows you are there, or even zip off if it looks like the fight is lost. Another issue was that status effects such as stun or immobilise were binary - they were either on or they had no effect - so it was possible for some characters to avoid any lock down despite having numerous effects applied, while other characters would be locked down in seconds and have no way to respond.
I13 contains a whole raft of changes to PvP down to changing the very basics of how CoH/V combat and powers work. Status effects (even healing) are now subject to diminishing returns. Protection against negative status effects have been increased across the board. Travel power suppression has been increased, although a number of things have been implemented to try to keep characters moving at speed. And so on - the short of it is that PvP in CoH/V is an entirely separate system to PvE.

I13 certainly has been successful in starting up discussions...
As would be expected, PvP players exploded at the news of these changes. Long arguments going back into closed beta have taken up a lot of Castle's (the Powers Guy, aka Floyd Grubb) time. Community manager Lighthouse (Alex von Minden) made the fairly common sense statement that the dev team had expected that "the current PvP community wasn't likely to react well to the changes as they wern't [sic] who we were making changes for" and got raked over the internal and external coals for it. (Some believe that it was this comment that led to LH announcing his resignation a week later - if he was fired, it was unusual for him to be given a farewell post; if he was resigning, he wouldn't have been allowed to give just a week's notice without a lot of internal agreement; most likely he was already going and, in the panic of trying to tie up all the loose ends he posted something that he normally wouldn't have). However, it is disingenuous to believe that the devs didn't think they would probably lose the majority of their existing dedicated PvP players due to the changes. The changes are just too big to keep them if they currently like the state of CoH/V PvP.
So, why change these systems at all? Simply because they aren't working to attract enough players to keep them viable. CoH/V wants to build up its PvP side - I'm sure NCsoft is strongly encouraging that they go and develop that aspect of the title - but it can't because PvP existed in a ghetto within CoH/V. It wouldn't be worth spending the time developing specialist PvP content when the vast majority of players wouldn't touch it. As for EPPs, players have been wanting more balance between hero and villains in this area for a long time. Both systems weren't working correctly and were only catering to a niche.
However, the reality is that every change costs players, especially at CoH/V's stage of life. It is being done at the right time - if you want another superhero MMO title to play, you'll have to wait at least a few months - but I wonder that even if the changes made CoH/V's PvP the best of any MMO and made the EPPs both incredibly well balanced if it would attract enough new players to counter-act any player loss. People play CoH/V predominantly as PvE game, with PvP being a very optional sideline. On top of this, the PvP changes make the gameplay even further away from standard CoH/V gameplay, so you'll have to learn how to play PvP in a completely different fashion to how PvE operates. When you cross that line, your powers no longer work the same way, which means that one large barrier to engaging in PvP (i.e. fast travel powers, fights over before you know it) is replaced by another one.
In many ways I think the devs of CoH/V are trapped - they want to take the game in dramatic new directions (Castle saying that CoH/V has all the complexity of tic tac toe is a pretty dramatic kiss-off to the title he works on) but the player base wants more of what they already have, only better. The devs are more likely to grow the player base by delivering high quality more-of-the-same - what is the Architect system other than a build-your-own PvE construction kit? - rather than trying to fix mistakes that have been around for nearly 5 years. Adding new powers to EPPs rather than taking them away would have also seemed like the logical path to take (and the devs eventually got there), while doing much to PvP other than recognising it is a self-sustaining niche is probably a waste of resources that isn't going to make people happy (either PvPers or PvEers or those who straddle the points in between).
Can you teach an old MMOG new tricks, or even just fix their bad tricks with new ones? Not without upsetting all the players who like the bad tricks and opening the door to the competition who already exceed you in those areas. It doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, but there aren't too many success stories (in fact, I can think of none) especially where direct competition for the MMO exists.
As a side note - I think the PvP changes are how Castle would have pretty much all combat powers function if he could go back in time and start from scratch. Diminishing returns, rather than additive benefits, would probably reduce the gap between min/maxed characters and more casual builds. However, a change that dramatic would probably only be exceeded by Star Wars Galaxies New Game Experience in terms of player outrage and unsubscription behaviour so would be extremely unlikely to ever happen. (That said, diminishing returns might be appearing on debuffs in new content, so that door is slightly open...)
There are a couple of reasons for this.
One is development time / resources - it might be a lot easier to change something before launch than after it due to certain other systems not being fixed / linked by that point.
Secondly is that there are always some players who like something that you don't, so what you call a "bad idea" is awesome to them. They post on the forums too.
Thirdly is that the devs are more likely to create new content than review old content, because creating new content is more exciting for them and also for players.
Fourthly it might be that the devs have no idea about how to easily fix one problematic system so that it works. They may want more data or time for evaluation before making a decision. And, even then, there is no guarantee that the fix will work as intended.
Fifthly players appear to be a lot more hysterical about any changes, so it could be easier to keep a system with a few known problems than implement a fix that create a whole raft of new problems.
Finally, change takes time. It could be that a change is planned for a certain system but it takes a few months to get developed, tested and launched. However, players complain that something isn't being looked at, or is taking too long if they know it is.
Originally posted by salvaje
Guess it will take a second Titanic disaster resulting from a NGE to make the industry learn the lesson that players DO NOT LIKE MASSIVE CHANGES. Nor do existing player bases like being forsaken in the name of "attracting lots of new players".
And all I can say is any company that hires an exec or manager from SOE is foolish. With NCSoft being a public company, I suspect a shareholder suit for malfeasence coming, something I wish could have been done to SOE.
First off, the ex-SOE person was John Needham, but he joined Cryptic Studios after it had sold off the CoH/V IP to NCsoft. So that's a mistake of the OP and one that erodes the whole "NCsoft is doing an NGE on CoH/V" vibe that the OP is going for.
Secondly, you're right in that players don't like massive changes, but when a system isn't working it needs to be fixed. Apart from the diehards, CoH/V PvP doesn't work because very few people even attempt to do it casually.
CoH/V PvP discourages any kind of casual play because the earliest experiences are getting ganked by a Stalker or seeing your opponent run away the second it looks like they are going to lose the battle. Also, there are a solid proportion of CoH/V players who would prefer the devs to say, "We've decided to remove all PvP from the game. In fact, we've taken out all the code, design notes and anything that might be vaguely related to PvP and set it on fire in the car park outside. No PvP in CoH/V ever again." Especially since the work on PvP has meant that other areas are being neglected.
PvP is generally a ghost town in CoH/V. The arenas are empty and the PvP zones are only visited for the temp powers they can provide for PvE. It has been this way since pretty much it was introduced.
I don't think all of I13 is a good idea, but trying to see if something can be done about getting more people into PvP - ahead of more PvP related content being developed - isn't a bad idea when the current system was played by such a small niche. However, I'm not sure any work on PvP is going to bring any new people in or make existing players happy, so I think it is wasted work.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp
Darkfall is already a huge success. It's a forum based game. YOu post about your ultimate perfect MMO, and call it Darkfall. Whatever you want in a game, Darkfall has it. When it doesn't come out this year, you just say, it'll be even better next year.It's kinda fun, but the graphics aren't that great.
I like that it works cross-browser and you can play on a low-end machine.
Originally posted by Ixnatifual
Completely false. Closed Beta NDA was raised from WAR about 4 weeks prior to launch. We were allowed to disclose everything we'd experienced in the beta, which included tiers 3-4 and end game (city sieges, king raids etc), and have been doing that on various fan forums since then.
It is indeed a bad sign when closed beta NDA isn't raised. WAR however is, as far as MMOs go, quite polished and was able to raise the NDA to fuel the hype.
May 19th I believe was the date it was lifted. You can easily verify this by Googling.
The NDA on the elder servers wasn't lifted at that point. So the basic game had its NDA lifted, but not the advanced stuff at the end.
Originally posted by Jefferson81
Originally posted by Netspook
No, MJ is not the new Brad.
Having said that, I had a lot of respect for MJ pre WAR lauch. But his behaviour lately, has been extremely unprofessional and I've lost all respect for the dude.
Ie, going crazy after that comment from Blizzard, which imo was no big deal, screaming "the gloves are now off" and whatever, acting like a spoiled child against ppl on forums, just because they don't bend down and worship him/WAR, etc.
Well, when it comes to mature, professional behaviour, or should I say the lack of, then maybe MJ = Brad after all.
What comment from Blizzard?
Could you provide a hotlink please?
Here's a good summary of the back and forth between Jacobs / WAR and WoW recently. Kaplan of WoW came out and said a few fairly common sense things (IMO), Jacobs responds with a few broadsides. It was a nerd slap fight.
Also, the comment about NDAs came from Jacob's himself. He made a comment about rating games by how fair ahead of launch the NDA lifts, then got smacked by the irony of being judged by those same standards that indicated Mythic had about "the minimum score you should expect from a MMO publisher" for WAR.
As for Jacobs is McQuaid: no. There is evidence that McQuaid drove Vangard into the ground through mismanagement, while Jacobs appears to be working hard on getting things moving (albeit often in the wrong direction). Both may be egotistical bastards, but I think the lead dev for any studio needs a hide like rhino skin to survive all the scrutiny.
What aspect of MMORPG's are you more into?