American_Angel

Originally Posted by BlueTurbo

I know this has been requested before, and this is not a game changer, but I'd like to

not pay base rent anymore. It's not alot, it's just inconvenient. If it can't be

eliminated, then please make it possible to pay without having to go to Atlas every

month.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by Impish Kat

This is not a bug.

While it didn't make it into the Official Patch Notes for i21, it was mentioned in one of the Beta Patches.
Sorting storage alphabetically has been a longstanding request by the community, especially since the log function was trashed in i13 (or was it i12?... same diff.).

.

Originally Posted by Tyger

All three base items can only be claimed once.

Originally Posted by Aggelakis

Without knowing her status Pre-I21, we cannot say for certain what she should have currently. She should have 2 (all F2P get them) + 2 (GR) for certain, then a variable number after that depending on previous subscription time and previously purchased slots.

No, you are not correct about Inventions. You can access and play characters who have IOs slotted, even if you don't have access to the Invention System (via 30-day license or permanent unlock). Your IOs simply don't work; you don't get any enhancement value from them, procs/globals don't work, and set bonuses don't work.

Originally Posted by Aggelakis

It's more than you get with most mtx zones. Most games don't even let you into the zone to poke around.

Originally Posted by Forbin_Project

The actual number of people that have bought boosters is most likely a lot closer to 50,000 to 60,000 for each booster pack.

If you are going to speculate about the numbers please try to make them believable.

Originally Posted by Redlynne

This is called being persistent. I know, because I'm the one who has been doing it. Zwillinger gave that answer in response to MY question in the UStream Chat. Because even the *shaping* of a refusal to "talk about bases" contains information which can inspire hope (or despair ... take your pick).

The most "promising" aspect of this consistent refusal to "talk about bases" in the context of persistent queries is that it is also entirely in keeping with company policy of "not talking about future developments" before they are ready to release information. For example:

Question (prior to Proliferation 3.0 announcement): "Can you talk about powerset proliferation?"
Answer: "No."

Question: "Why aren't Dominators included in Powerset Proliferation 3.0 in Issue 21?"
Answer: "Because we're doing something else for Dominators that will be Awesome™!"
Follow up Question: "Can you tell us more about that?"
Answer: "No."

Question: "Can you tell us more about what you're going to be doing with the remaining Incarnate Slots which have yet to be unlocked?"
Answer: "No."

The point that I want EVERYONE in this forum to take to heart is that Paragon Studios has a *habit* of working on things and not talking about them "before they're ready" to talk about them. They didn't "talk about" powerset proliferation ... but they were working on it (and oh boy were they working on it!) just the same, as we now know. They aren't "talking about" powerset proliferation, or possibly even NEW powersets(!) for Dominators (and Controllers?) post-Issue 21. Is there anyone here who wants to believe that means that they're doing *NOTHING* for Dominators post-Issue 21? They won't "talk about" what the remaining unlockable Incarnate Slots are going to do, which Trials they'll be tied to, what currency they'll use to craft the enhancements ... any of that stuff. But does anyone *BELIEVE* that because the Devs "won't talk about it" that they're "not doing anything" in this area? Let's just say that believing that would be ... foolish.



And now we have repeated statements that the Devs "can't talk about bases" in a manner that is *entirely consistent* with development work either scheduled, in progress, or possibly even both. We also know that the the Programming Team is "booked solid" as far as team time is concerned for the next 6 months (or so, at least!), and that ... one ... of the production bottlenecks in Development of new features for the game right now is Programming. Tunnel Rat has said so in UStream chats. Other Devs (Synapse? Second Measure?) have said so in UStream chats.

Anyone want to speculate how much Programming Development *any* kind of Base Editor work would require ... let alone a wholesale revamp? Personally, I'm thinking "not trivial" would be the best answer to that question (especially if talking wholesale revamp).



Yes, this IS a game of Blind Man's Bluff at this point to try and figure out what is going on with SG Bases in the development cycle. But at the same time, Paragon Studios does have a Modus Operandi when it comes to "talking about" things to develop. We've seen THAT before ... and it's better than even money that we're seeing it in operation NOW with respect to future SG Bases Development. The one thing we CAN be sure of is that there isn't going to be any kind of finished and finalized push of enhanced Base Functionality in Issue 21. THAT MUCH has been made clear.

But Second Measure, in his role as Producer, and by his own admission on saturday's UStream broadcast from SDCC, "lives in the future" of CoH:F because he's already engaging in meetings about what is going into Issues 22 and 23 (and possibly even 24, although he didn't state this explicitly).

Question: "Can you talk about Issue 22?"
Answer: "No."

Question: "Can you talk about future development(s) for SG Bases?"
Answer: "No."

Anyone want to believe that the Devs are NOT working on Issue 22, even in a preliminary capacity? I'm willing to bet the answer to that is "NO" simply because it's self-evident that they must be, already.

Anyone want to believe that the Devs are NOT doing any work on SG Bases ... ever again? Note very carefully that if SG Bases were an "abandoned feature" as so many of us had feared, it would be VERY EASY for someone ... anyone ... to come along and flat out state, for the record, that there are NO PLANS, of any kind, anywhere in the forseeable future, to do anything at all with SG Bases. The Devs *HAVE* come out and said, in answer to questions about some topics, that there is "No Work Being Done" or planned to be done in that area. When something is *NOT* up for revision/remodeling/redevelopment, the Devs have been forthcoming in saying so, that there is no effort being expended in that direction. They don't say, "we aren't talking about it" (or words to that effect), they just come right out and say that there's nothing being done or there are no resources allocated for that effort. THAT they DO say.



Significantly, in this case, the Devs are NOT saying there's *nothing* happening on the SG Bases front. What they DO SAY is that they "can't talk about" what IS (or is not, if you're pessimistic about this ... still) happening on the SG Bases front. And that "can't talk about it" response is entirely in keeping with something happening.

It's not going to be something for Issue 21 ... that much is clear.

But it might be Issue 22 ... or maybe even Issue 23 (which at this point I would peg at being a year away, for Issue 23). At the very least though ... SOMETHING ... appears to be happening ... so long as you're a decent player at the game of Blind Man's Bluff ... and if you've been paying attention to the *shape* of the language Paragon Studios uses to talk (or not) about what is being worked on, but news of which hasn't leaked yet.



This analysis is by no means conclusive PROOF of a development effort for SG Bases at Paragon Studios ... but if you're inclined to optimism (and not everyone who reads this forum is, at this point), it IS a reason to (re)kindle a flame that has long been guttering and dying.

HOPE.



If you know how to read the signs, and not be overwhelmed by your past disappointments and cynicsm ... it is possible to hope. Whether you do, or not, is up to you.



Me? I'm betting on hope.

Originally Posted by Doctor Vivian

I think that this is a case where your love for bases, and your very powerful desire to see them grow and evolve is blinding you to the financial realities that have forced them to take a back burner in the face of more urgent development priorities.

I would like us to take a step back and try to give it an objective look.

Rhetorically, in your opinion, how many base builders are there in the playerbase right now that would pay real world money in the form of microtransactions to build their bases? One hundred? Two hundred? Five hundred? A thousand?

Among that number of base-builders, among those who would spend real-world-money under a microtransaction model, you'll find a wide range of money spent -- wealthy builders will plop down hundreds of dollars, whereas more frugal souls will eke out single dollars for specific, highly-desired items and grind to make the rest.

Let's say the average builder's "buy" for base items is around $20. That means that the average base builder will spend $20 on base items. Fair, right? Some few may spend more, but the vast majority will spend less -- or nothing.

Let's take the largest number above -- a thousand base builders -- and multiply that by $20... it's $20,000.

But let's say there are two thousand base builders -- let's say that the new base shinies and larger population from F2P will attract more folks, and double the number of buyers! Yet... that's still only $40,000.

Let's be crazy and double that again for no apparent reason -- it's still only $80,000.

This is not a "large source" of revenue... large sources are several millions of dollars. Moreover, and perhaps more importantly -- this is not "recurring" revenue.

Much like a Pack, Base Item Purchases would be one-shot, one-time purchases. Packs are inherently risky, as they cost a certain amount to develop, and each player will only buy one of them. If they don't sell enough to cover their cost of development, then NCsoft winds up breaking even -- or losing money on the Pack. Not exactly ideal.

In order to prosper, CoX needs recurring revenue. That's money that keeps coming in, month after month. This is needed in order to be able for Paragon Studios to afford more permanent staff and for CoX to rise on the ranks of NCsoft's Annual Earnings Reports -- for that is truly its only safeguard against eventual dissolution.

Bear in mind that the cost of overhauling SG Bases involves several months of work by a team of programmers, modelers, texture artists, riggers, animators, effect artists, designers, testers and producers. That labor represents a cost of many hundreds of thousands of dollars, not including the other overhead of the company surrounding them.

However -- that being said, and that sobering dose of reality having been handed out, I do have a suggestion that would make all of this possible:

If SG base "rent" was ACTUAL rent -- in other words, if it was a real, recurring monthly cost in real-world money -- that would serve to justify the expense of a Base Overhaul. I.e., if a case could be made that the income from a base overhaul would see a Return on Investment within "X" months for NCsoft, we'd probably see it happen.

Yet -- I cannot help but think that the base builder and player community would wholeheartedly reject any such extra recurring monthly cost for something they have received for free for so long already.

So, we are at an impasse -- and thus, in my humble opinion, Bases will probably stay exactly where they are until and unless the Free-to-Play model injects a ton of cash and changes the current dynamic.

-- Vivian

Originally Posted by Cende

Okay, folks,

We're all builders here, together. None of that "you're new here, aren't you?"

GH, someone could easily come back and say that you're new to the EU forums, they've been just as polite on their base builder forums and they've never had an issue, you know.

"Exploits" was not meant in a bad way in this particular thread title, although I think it was a bit of a mistake to use it. It leads to too many misunderstandings.