Wondering_Fury

Isn't PFF borked now, because of the Elusivity changes? I quote someone else, I don't really understand what they done to it.

Fury

Sorry but I have to re-iterate but 'Break-Frees' do not work. Period.

Fury

Tbh if your pvping and you constantly have to go to the shop to fill up every time you use them, and I mean in a short duration, your doing something wrong. Constantly filling it up for the whole benefit of your toon's PvP clearly means your build is poor.

Otherwise I wouldn't care, my stalker always keeps the odd purple to make up for the fact my DEF is too low at toggle-value. I've always found the game a little fast-paced for an insp to do that much.

Fury

Break Free's don't work in PvP.

Tbh mez is wrecked in PvP in my opinion. I've still managed to combat it though.

[ QUOTE ]
Would you consider it fair if a blaster popped 10 rages and 10 lucks before you start your 1 v 1?

[/ QUOTE ]
Some people do that in zonal, since it's still reasonably fast-paced there's no point popping 10 of them. Just wastes your tray.

Fury

GG are you an Egyptian of ancestral descent, these pyramids are sprouting like hell.

Fury

Your first post is completely invalidated by the fact they didn't want it to be released at this stage, in fact I think it's practically the preliminary stages since Castle had to keep his mouth well and truly shut. The problem with this is it's probably brought their deadline further up now since it's been exposed, and tonnes of people will be guess-estimating an arrival time. We at least know it's after I-15.

The other problem is the hype and speculation we've brung on these forums now it's exposed. If we had had a press-release without our discovery we would know everything about it and would not be able to speculate. So right now we could easily build ourselves our own anti-climax as usual. I honestly don't think we can criticise them without them releasing the information first. Because after all, right now all we have is a confirmation it's happening, nothing content-wise.

I completely agree with JD's post, well said.

Personally, all those who cried-wolf and finally left just got slapped for 100000000 points of embarrassing damage.

Fury

Enlighted Wrath.
Subtle Cries
Vengeful Dawn
Starry Light
Stalwart Fury
Resolute/ Resolution

Fury(Taken)

After seeing the likes of Whoogie's Elec/Regen, Elec is really good at spiking like he said. You can do ridiculous amounts in comparison to other sets.

Couple that with /regen and say hibernate + phase you have a silly amount of panic-safe buttons, which are practically essential.

Fury

Tbh stalkers nowadays either dual-AS in zonal PvP (dunno about arena) or hit and kite. I love my EM/Ninj' stalker, the only problem is in PvE I have an average 60% DEF, then in PvP due to PvP environment it plummets to around 32/36% which against blasters is not so perfect.

In my opinion, for the best stalker for PvP, depending your sets. You want the highest survivability and spike-damage you can get. My EM/Ninj' just AS's, placates and TF the squishys and generally only duel-AS blasters. For kiting I use hibernate or a panic button. Never liked 'Phase' cause you can get hit now.

Fury

[ QUOTE ]
Production Assistants: Noobs

[/ QUOTE ]
I lolled.

Also at the Time clocks at the start. Good video in my opinion, as JD stated. It's towards non-players, why the hell do you want PR towards us selling us the game we already play?

Fury

[ QUOTE ]

While your at it. Fix the heavys too. In fact, remove them.
Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tbh, it's the morons who use them in PvP that ruin it. Tis for an equal fight m'lurd.

My ar£e.

Fury

I-Cox.

Fury

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
These are all perfectly cromulant words.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't that like some kind of Hyborean adjective?

[/ QUOTE ]

No it's a star trekki on a bad day.

Fury

[ QUOTE ]
Was anyone else worried by the term 'thought-crime'? Very Orwellian...

[/ QUOTE ]

We are dystopian.

Fury

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even retroactive ban threat is quite reasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree here. Retrospect ie banning is not reasonable. You are punushing someone for something that you,by your inaction, told them it was ok to do.

[/ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It still doesn't matter. Whatever the players want or think or threaten or whine, it's completely irrelevant. You waived any rights either at signup or sign on - see that "Agree" button? That's the one that says, "I acknowledge that I don't have a leg to stand on".

[/ QUOTE ]

It's relevant because I'm paying for a bunch of judgemental ban-waivers to/or not to condemn some of my toons based on a poorly explained policy.

EDIT: The MA farming policy wasn't included within whatever agreement your referring to, I can conclude that since the only policy we've heard is the one from the dev's mouth.

Fury

Yea that really is quite silly, it sounds like an awful defence of "We wanted to release it supah early but it was bugged with tonnes of XP, but meh." We'll just warn you with a very vague policy.

Fury

But tell me this, if a dev' slaps a suspension/ban to a player for a fair chunk of time. Do you really think they'll stick around?

Fury

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps the specific advantageous use of disadvantaged A.I? To a degree.*

But odd, I remember reading a US post from Castle saying that Ghost Widow could be soloed, because he "knows" her A.I. So didn't he exploit?

Fury

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry I couldn't edit for some reason, just wanted someone to have a stab at countering the bolded. He is a dev' btw.

Fury

Perhaps the specific advantageous use of disadvantaged A.I? To a degree.*

But odd, I remember reading a US post from Castle saying that Ghost Widow could be soloed, because he "knows" her A.I. So didn't he exploit?

Fury

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To me an exploit is using an automated bot, or getting under a map and killing things that cant target you.

Using what is legitimately available in the game, in my opinion, is not an exploit.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

especially when the devs say they saw it coming.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Londoner is bang-on to a degree, that is how I would define it to an extent. The problem is exploits in this game will be specific, and therefore you can not generalise a simple "No..", It has to be a specific "No...";"No.." and "No... etc."

Fury

Careful not to confuse MA farming in my posts, and real-game-time farming using content by the way. In my posts, I refer to real-game-time for clarification.

Fury

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's simply my vendetta personally, you can not possibly issue suspensions/bannings without an "iron-clad" policy, it doesn't make sense. It's simply going trigger-happy if you will, especially if it's left to all the dev's own opinions which will all vary across this implement.

Fury

[/ QUOTE ]

But what if they lock 50s that were PLed within a certain timefame - say 1 through 50 in 24 hours or so, but don't actually give a definitive point on what is ok and what isn't - that'd leave the players to work it out themselves, and as there'd be no offical limit, they might start to be more cautious in how fast they tried to PL.

[/ QUOTE ]

Albeit that is a very good counter GG, I still won't be moved in that they have to release some sort of policy that we can adhere to. It's just coming across to me far too brash to simply say "Well, Hero 8678 has had 40/50 hours."

Dev' 1: That is PL.
Dev' 2: That is not PL.
Dev' 3: That is debatable.

Etc, I say 40/50 because that's the "grey area" some toons can efficiently go from 1-50 in normal gameplay unbelievably. And also in a moderate farmers time-scale. So therein lies my question, What's the policy? You can not rely on an opinion to decide bans/suspensions, it is their game but an opinion can not be the defense of a dev's choice to suspend/ban. Because then I can say well I did this that, SO'ed that, teamed that, TF'ed that, etc. And that's MY opinion countering his, albeit I'd probably be ousted anyway from the looks of it.

EDIT: Sorry if my offtopic TopicAuthor, tell me stop if I am.

Fury

In quick succession, I believe some are being a bit quiet since theres a bat wavering above us. I like real-time non-MA farming, but I foresee that'll be within the policy too. Btw, those who believe that "farmers" upset the market, go look up the dictionary for what a farmer does and connect it to the game. They supply the stuff which you buy, the more that supplies then the less it becomes. Prices will sky-rocket. Purples un-obtainable, that is if normal farming is caught in the cluster-sh**. But here's a thought, there going nuts over PL and not farming. Think about this:

What if I got a 8man team of 50's to farm?

Fury

That's simply my vendetta personally, you can not possibly issue suspensions/bannings without an "iron-clad" policy, it doesn't make sense. It's simply going trigger-happy if you will, especially if it's left to all the dev's own opinions which will all vary across this implement.

Fury

Isn't it ironic how most 50's that are lively used are farmers or partake in the activity, i.e farming is considered almost a end-game content function. And you can't disregard it, I've played many a farm with hundreds of 50's who just want to do something.

Fury