New efforts!

[Thunder Glove]

Quick apply at NCSoft 

You really need to apply for a position at NCSoft....... 

ORIGINALITY!

I suggest you go to South Korea and apply directly to work with NCSoft.

[Tubbius]

I am very tired.  I want City of Heroes to come back so I have something else to do on my weeknights than work, play The Binding of Isaac, play Marvel Heroes, survive The Long Dark, eat, and sleep. 

[Arcana]

Most other MMO's do not allow stacking buffs so you get one buffer and the rest are useless it sucks quite a bit. Now the game Rift was like that but at least you could have like 8 different builds and you could swap to the build depending on what you need as long as you where not in combat but you had to have heals and a tank build to do team content and every class had some tank or heal build

In my experience most MMOs allow at least some buff stacking.  Sometimes buffs are limited in the maximum amount of stacking, and sometimes there are other limits.  Even CoH had limits on stacking; in particular the prohibition on stacking from the same caster for many buffs.

Sometimes stacking limits can limit the effectiveness of multiple buffers, but sometimes that can happen for other reasons.  City of Heroes was vulnerable to saturation - where in theory you could stack buffers as much as you like, but beyond a certain point the benefit of multiple buffers was mooted even if numerically they were both contributing.  For example, it was rare for two force field buffers to have significant benefit in CoH, and practically impossible for three or more to do so.  We were also vulnerable to attribute caps: because the resistance cap was relatively low for most archetypes, that placed a limit on how much benefit you could get from multiple resistance buffers.  There were also practical issues: technically speaking there was a difference between having five rads and six rads, but as a practical matter virtually no player could ever detect the difference in actual play.

The irony here is that diminishing returns** would mitigate this problem, but was strongly opposed by many of the same people who asked for a solution to the saturation problem.


** Diminishing returns had a bad rap, mostly by being poorly understood conceptually.  For example, recharge buffs have a net diminishing return on investment, but for reasons few players could correctly explain.  The fact that successive recharge buffs caused recharge durations to drop in increasingly smaller increments was *not* the reason.  That actually represents *constant* benefit, neither accelerating nor diminishing.  The real reason has to do with the mechanics of recharge relative to activation.

[JoshexProxy]

ORIGINALITY!

wow, with so many people saying I should, I'll just have to go notify all the agencies that hate me that I'm applying for a job at NCSoft and then do a bloopie application. who knows it might work.

[hejtmane]

In my experience most MMOs allow at least some buff stacking.  Sometimes buffs are limited in the maximum amount of stacking, and sometimes there are other limits.  Even CoH had limits on stacking; in particular the prohibition on stacking from the same caster for many buffs.

Sometimes stacking limits can limit the effectiveness of multiple buffers, but sometimes that can happen for other reasons.  City of Heroes was vulnerable to saturation - where in theory you could stack buffers as much as you like, but beyond a certain point the benefit of multiple buffers was mooted even if numerically they were both contributing.  For example, it was rare for two force field buffers to have significant benefit in CoH, and practically impossible for three or more to do so.  We were also vulnerable to attribute caps: because the resistance cap was relatively low for most archetypes, that placed a limit on how much benefit you could get from multiple resistance buffers.  There were also practical issues: technically speaking there was a difference between having five rads and six rads, but as a practical matter virtually no player could ever detect the difference in actual play.

The irony here is that diminishing returns** would mitigate this problem, but was strongly opposed by many of the same people who asked for a solution to the saturation problem.


** Diminishing returns had a bad rap, mostly by being poorly understood conceptually.  For example, recharge buffs have a net diminishing return on investment, but for reasons few players could correctly explain.  The fact that successive recharge buffs caused recharge durations to drop in increasingly smaller increments was *not* the reason.  That actually represents *constant* benefit, neither accelerating nor diminishing.  The real reason has to do with the mechanics of recharge relative to activation.

I played quite a few and COH was the only one that I played that allowed it to happen. I have no clue about WOW I skipped it and went to Horizons before ending up at COH. I went back to Rift for a bit after COH went under but if you can not raid (which is hard for me to do anymore) then it is quite a boring game but you be running a 20 man group with one debuffer/buffer because all you did was over write each others debuffs. DAOC did not allow stacking debuffs but that had a lot of PVP in the realm wars(which was a big part of the game) so I think they were always scared of stacking debuffs and control powers lots of teeth gnashing over them because of the big PVP component. Ultimta really did not have  alot of debuffs back when I played it but that was like 1997 and was a full open sandbox game uh the body runs. Few handful of other ones

[LaughingAlex]

Guild wars had no stacking of any kind, and different primary classes were thus required due to max skill limits being a big factor of success or failure.  This resulted in very routine "waiting for x build", with some people even demanding perfect builds for those roles.  Granted I never saw demand for "16 x skill req" builds(such runes required 20+ plats which was ludicrous) but very routinely I made no progress past specific missions for it.  No one available for a mission with a VERY specific spell(2nd Luxon mission is a true example of this and is impossible without said spell unless you are literally running a team of gods)?  Sorry never moving forward anymore!   Sucks to be you!

Such to me is horrible design.  And GW 1 factions was brutally linear.  Which was why smart players soloing had no choice but to go the kurzick path, cause luxons were unwinnable by design that way.

[Talon Blue]

I am very tired.  I want City of Heroes to come back so I have something else to do on my weeknights than work, play The Binding of Isaac, play Marvel Heroes, survive The Long Dark, eat, and sleep. 

Amen brother.

[Takinalis]

I watch a lot of movies now... 

[Arcana]

I played quite a few and COH was the only one that I played that allowed it to happen. I have no clue about WOW I skipped it and went to Horizons before ending up at COH. I went back to Rift for a bit after COH went under but if you can not raid (which is hard for me to do anymore) then it is quite a boring game but you be running a 20 man group with one debuffer/buffer because all you did was over write each others debuffs. DAOC did not allow stacking debuffs but that had a lot of PVP in the realm wars(which was a big part of the game) so I think they were always scared of stacking debuffs and control powers lots of teeth gnashing over them because of the big PVP component. Ultimta really did not have  alot of debuffs back when I played it but that was like 1997 and was a full open sandbox game uh the body runs. Few handful of other ones

It might come down to what MMOs a person has played and not played.  Some MMOs use a system I tend to call "named buffs."  I think Rift was like this and Guild Wars was like this.  Buffs aren't stackable quantities because they are really more like booleans: you have them or you don't.  You can't stack two of them because they are light switches: on or off.  Some systems even went farther (I think Warhammer was like this) in that there were buff categories, and you could only have the best named buff within each category.

I think SWTOR originally allowed most things to stack, but I think they changed at on the second or third balancing pass.  Eve Online allows stacking, but they (being probably among the most mathematically literate MMO developers I've seen) use what a CoH quant would call multiplicative stacking.  I played both D&D Online and Age of Conan long enough to know both had some form of buff stacking in at least some cases, but not long enough to have figured out the byzantine rules for when it does and doesn't.  And of course coming from Cryptic, CO and STO both have at least some form of buff stacking, STO with more limits than CO (I think: I haven't played CO in forever).  I think DCUO started off with more buff stacking and gradually moved more to binary exclusive buffs.

Even when a game has exclusive (non-stacking) buffs, there's the separate question of how that impacts gameplay.  For example, consider two buffers A and B.  If they both possess buff X and X is non-stacking, then only one of them can really provide that buff: the other one cannot buff the team.  But if buffers A and B both possess a range of buffs, say X, Y, and Z, and X, Y, and Z are all exclusive, it could still be that while the buffs don't stack, the buffers can stack by each providing one of those three buffs to the team.  The problem with stacking comes mainly when two different players (characters) both offer the exact same thing and only one of them can do anything at all.  In other words, even in City of Heroes where almost all buffs (from different casters) stack, two FF defenders can still end up not really stacking with each other in practical terms.  Meanwhile, in another game two identical buffers could stack even if their buffs don't stack, if they have a range of mutually beneficial buffs.

[Brigadine]

It might come down to what MMOs a person has played and not played.  Some MMOs use a system I tend to call "named buffs."  I think Rift was like this and Guild Wars was like this.  Buffs aren't stackable quantities because they are really more like booleans: you have them or you don't.  You can't stack two of them because they are light switches: on or off.  Some systems even went farther (I think Warhammer was like this) in that there were buff categories, and you could only have the best named buff within each category.

I think SWTOR originally allowed most things to stack, but I think they changed at on the second or third balancing pass.  Eve Online allows stacking, but they (being probably among the most mathematically literate MMO developers I've seen) use what a CoH quant would call multiplicative stacking.  I played both D&D Online and Age of Conan long enough to know both had some form of buff stacking in at least some cases, but not long enough to have figured out the byzantine rules for when it does and doesn't.  And of course coming from Cryptic, CO and STO both have at least some form of buff stacking, STO with more limits than CO (I think: I haven't played CO in forever).  I think DCUO started off with more buff stacking and gradually moved more to binary exclusive buffs.

Even when a game has exclusive (non-stacking) buffs, there's the separate question of how that impacts gameplay.  For example, consider two buffers A and B.  If they both possess buff X and X is non-stacking, then only one of them can really provide that buff: the other one cannot buff the team.  But if buffers A and B both possess a range of buffs, say X, Y, and Z, and X, Y, and Z are all exclusive, it could still be that while the buffs don't stack, the buffers can stack by each providing one of those three buffs to the team.  The problem with stacking comes mainly when two different players (characters) both offer the exact same thing and only one of them can do anything at all.  In other words, even in City of Heroes where almost all buffs (from different casters) stack, two FF defenders can still end up not really stacking with each other in practical terms.  Meanwhile, in another game two identical buffers could stack even if their buffs don't stack, if they have a range of mutually beneficial buffs.

Lineage 2 automatically applies the best one and stores the previous one with the timer still running and not applied in the backround.

[Twisted Toon]

That's one to a PvP zone (right?), so it obviously runs on the tears of carebears. Or something like that.

Last I knew, Faultline wasn't a PvP zone. It was the zone with a dam at the back end of it, and the Dev's lounge hidden away somewhere. Also, the Doughnut is there.

[MM3squints]

Last I knew, Faultline wasn't a PvP zone. It was the zone with a dam at the back end of it, and the Dev's lounge hidden away somewhere. Also, the Doughnut is there.

Heli next to Faultline goes to Bloody Bay

[Brigadine]

Last I knew, Faultline wasn't a PvP zone. It was the zone with a dam at the back end of it, and the Dev's lounge hidden away somewhere. Also, the Doughnut is there.

Have you seen the one in Grandville?

https://youtu.be/khcSIVVQ26Q

[Codewalker]

Lineage 2 automatically applies the best one and stores the previous one with the timer still running and not applied in the backround.

The I23/I24 era COH engine supports the same thing, actually, with the relatively new kSuppress stack type. Only the buff with the highest magnitude applies, all others are suppressed. The only power to make use of it is Victory Rush, the tier 5 Leadership power.

[Rejolt]

I watch a lot of movies now... 

If I wasn't playing basketball, I was a couch potato. Now I watch TV from my PC chair ... Maybe. Years of habits are hard to break.

[Balince]

If I wasn't playing basketball, I was a couch potato. Now I watch TV from my PC chair ... Maybe. Years of habits are hard to break.

Yup, I've tried to play games from my couch but I feel the need to be close, so I grab a chair and my little desk for my wireless mouse and keyboard and sit 2 feet closer. Lol

[LaughingAlex]

The I23/I24 era COH engine supports the same thing, actually, with the relatively new kSuppress stack type. Only the buff with the highest magnitude applies, all others are suppressed. The only power to make use of it is Victory Rush, the tier 5 Leadership power.

So they were going to trinity-ize the game, yeah I don't think I'd have stayed around after that.

Unless, oh your talking only one power using it.  I wonder what made victory rush so special that they had to limit it's stacking?

Oh yeah, I know that, the interface powers also had something similar, they only stacked up to 5 max and any more then that from anyone wouldn't add up.

[Codewalker]

So they were going to trinity-ize the game, yeah I don't think I'd have stayed around after that.

Unless, oh your talking only one power using it.  I wonder what made victory rush so special that they had to limit it's stacking?

It spawns a different pseudo-pet depending on the class (minion, lt, boss, AV) of enemy that it's used on. Since it's a pool power, they wanted it not to stack, much like Vengeance doesn't. But it would suck if a boss/AV level buff got overwritten by somebody else's minion level buff, as in replace stacking. It would also suck if you wasted the duration of the new buff because one was already active, as in ignore stacking. Thus: Suppress stacking.

[Auroxis]

Would've been nice to have it early for Vengeance as well. I liked having Vengeance at ridiculously high defense levels with enhancements+power boost(slotted with hami-o's before the nerf), reached like +90% defense IIRC. Then someone overrode my Vengeance with an unenhanced one.

[Arcana]

So they were going to trinity-ize the game

I have no idea what you think "trinity" gameplay is anymore, because it can't be what most people think it is.  Because its logically impossible for any kind of stacking limitation to make a game more focused on trinity-requirement teams when stacking limitations predominantly only affect cases where there's at least two of the same thing on the team.

That would be just as illogical as saying changes to buff stacking were going to force people to stop soloing.


Hard mez doesn't promote non-trinity play.  Hard mez promotes hard mez counters which encourage trinity play (cf: Incarnate trials).  Unlimited buff stacking doesn't promote non-trinity play.  Unlimited buff stacking promotes buff saturation play, which, while not conventional trinity play is the exact opposite of encouraging diversity.  These two things have been acknowledged to be broken since almost the very beginning of the game by both the devs *and* most CoH quants, and the game had evolved over time since launch to soften the edges of both, always to the net benefit of increasing diversity of play.

Part of the problem is that some players can only see what hard mez and unlimited stacking offers.  They don't see all the things that we were prevented from having because those two things existed, because its not as easy to see prevention.  But take power pool defenses, in particular powers like hover and maneuvers.  The reason why those powers are so minuscule for the vast majority of players and only significant in effect for power gamers that can stack them with lots of other things is explicitly because of the broken CoH stacking rules for defense (of which there are several ways in which its broken).  Not only did the stacking rules for defense make it impossible to buff those powers, in fact they were *nerfed* from their original strength at launch, from "low" to "really low."  There are literally hundreds of examples of things players could not have because hard mez rules and buff stacking rules basically made those otherwise reasonable things game-breaking in unacceptable (to the devs, the only judgment that counts) ways.