Arcanaville

[ QUOTE ]
Here's my little beef about this system (from the Blue side perspective). I don't really care for the "entertainment" or Holo-deck explanation for this tool. If I'm role playing, would a hero actually go to a store and make a "simulated" game for other heroes to play? This doesn't seem to really fit into the general theme of the game-- fighting bad guys-- not simulated bad guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Simulators can malfunction

2. Simulators can be hacked

3. Crey has been known to lie

4. Dr. Aeon is a flake

The current backstory is not as limiting as it might appear at first glance.

[ QUOTE ]
Does anyone know if that has changed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone knows that that has changed (subject to change).

[ QUOTE ]
What happens when someone makes an entire enemy faction of Masterminds? O_o
For that matter, what happens when someone makes the faction entirely Controllers?

[/ QUOTE ]

I go in with my pet Hamidon and clean their clocks.


(I'm kidding about the pet Hamidon. Hamidon can't move. The Kronos Titan would be a better choice.)

[ QUOTE ]
I asked directly about public comments with our ratings, and told:

"There are no public comments available. It has been considered but will not be in for release."



Bummer.

Well, it's pretty obvious that this is a highly desired feature, so we can only hope they will implement it later.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the meantime, I figure people will start threads specifically to comment on or discuss specific story arcs, and that will have to do until an in-game way of doing that is found.

Authors may even start such threads themselves, both to get feedback and to publicize their arcs.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If a mission achieves Hall of Fame Status and/or Dev's Choice status, is there any possibility that it will move out of the MA building, and into the real game world?

"Real" Game world....now there's an oxymoron!

[/ QUOTE ]Yes. They have said (somewhere) that material they consider good enough will become an actual part of the game canon.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Can." Not "will." Because the devs can decide to make anything canon they want. They are not under any obligation to make anything canon no matter how well written or well rated or even dev-choiced. They are just saying that anything is possible. I would recommend no one get their hopes up here.

[ QUOTE ]
All I can see is this, if merits dont become global and or we dont get some account based storage soon, alot of people are going to get burned out on this system. I understand they want people to play more but this is getting some what rediculous. This game heavily relys on the creation of alts to keep the game fresh, but when you get burned out on all the content and you have little reason to create alts because you dread how long its going to take to get some of the IOs, and playing multiple characters makes it take longer to get even one of the desired rewards. Never would I thought I would see the day when you get punished for making and playing alts .

[/ QUOTE ]

I know I'm not going to live to see the day players stop claiming to be punished just because they don't get what they want.

Also: people have been complaining about being punished for playing alts since practically the first day I started reading the forums. Its not by any stretch a new complaint. It was used to describe level 50 unlocking of EATs, Hamidon enhancements, capes and auras, supergroup bases, and even the markets themselves.

[ QUOTE ]
As for the exploit thing, I think the problem is that the devs, Castle in particular I think, have used the word "exploit" rather carelessly in the past

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't say "carelessly." The term simply means different things in different contexts, and at least some of the confusion is the accidental or deliberate attempt to use the definition from one context in an unrelated one.

For example, "exploiting the game mechanics" simply means finding a clearly unintended game mechanical behavior, and using it to some advantage - any advantage. The Hover unrooting bug is an example of that. On the other hand, exploiting the reward system has a different meaning: usually this requires performing a sequence of tasks that generate a much higher level of reward earning rate than the devs originally designed for. Neither of these is related to the definition in use when the term is used within the context of punishment - i.e. Exploitive behavior: this is when players knowingly act in a manner that is detrimental to the game (at least as the devs interpret such actions).

There are degrees of exploit: if the devs believe that task force X is harder than task force Y but the players know different, they can exploit that knowledge to earn more rewards by playing X more often than Y. The devs would call that exploitive because it *is* exploitive, but the most that would happen is that they would correct their error, by altering the reward rate of X. That is *not* "punishing people for being good at X." Its essentially fixing a bug in the reward tables: addressing an error.

On the other hand, if the devs think X is hard, but a player realizes that if they end the mission while in the air and backflipping, the reward window will repeat itself after collecting the reward, earning the player an unlimited number of rewards, *that* is Exploitive with a capital E, and repercussions are likely to ensue. No one can reasonably assert that the game is designed so that smart enough players earn the right to tamper with the in-game reward mechanism for their own profit.

In this case, Positron is probably specifically addressing reward-system exploits when he refers to "moral compass." If you think you're getting a free lunch, you probably are, and its probably unintented on the part of the devs.


The only term casually used by players that has more specific context-sensitive meanings than the word "exploit" is probably the term "balance."

[ QUOTE ]
What I am saying is that for the 2nd issue in a row, people who knew this 2 weeks ago have been able to gain an advantage, and they have used that advantage.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is extremely unlikely that anyone possessed knowledge that could have provided a significant market advantage to themselves two weeks ago.

[ QUOTE ]
In that case, is there something stopping people from choosing two non-attack powersets

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[ QUOTE ]
I find their stance to be somewhat schizophrenic when it comes to "farming". On one hand, they implement stuff like aggro/aoe caps, timers on missions, etc. But then on the other hand, they implement stuff like Leader, Purples, Merits, and increase things like the Illusionist badge to levels that are simply ridiculous. "We don't want you to farm, but we are putting in stuff that if you want it in a decent amount of time, you have to farm."

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not schizophrenic. The correct statement is "we don't want you to farm, but we are putting in stuff that you might not get in a decent amount of time, by your definition of decent. If you try to farm, we'll take certain steps to stop you, but we might not be able to stop farming without side-effects that are more detrimental to the game than we, the developers, feel is tolerable."

This isn't really all that difficult to understand, even if one disagrees with it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


How can anyone say this isn’t great?


[/ QUOTE ]

How? I’ll tell you how.

First, it will deflate the population of potential teammates. Want to run that Sewer Trial for the badge, and for the fun of it, because you haven’t run one in forever? Want to run the 2nd respec task force to re-do your character’s slots or powers? Want help taking down Infernal? Well, guess what? Your pool of participants will be reduced by the MA in a real, and not-insignificant way - those potential teammates who could have joined you are working - whoops! I meant to say “writing” - MA arcs and aren’t playing as characters.

Second, it is a gimmick completely disconnected from the CoH game lore. Let’s face it, the MA is a stand-alone “feature” in the game that doesn’t develop any of the CoH backstory. It’s a flashy gimmick intended to sell box sets, and grab publicity and attention from the gaming world. In other words, it’s a marketing tool to get more cash into the devs' pockets.

Third, the vast majority of “storytelling” will be cringe-worthy. Have you read through the fanfic in the roleplay section of this very forum? No offense to anyone, but it ain’t my cup of tea - I cannot spend more than 90 seconds reading through any of it before I cringe, embarrassed, and click out of it. A lot of my in-game friends cannot spell. A LOT. A lot of my in-game friends have no imagination when it comes to creating an interesting costume (copy-paste the “Enforcer” outfit and change the colors and body size, literally, to a dozen characters). A LOT. A lot of my in-game friends who have actually written character bios have produced only derivative and loopy ones (you have seen that thread in our forum where the person - however mean-spirited it might have been - was copying ridiculous character bios to his website blog, haven’t you?). A LOT.

Fourth, the “writing” that will come from the MA is going to be very limited - sure, you can write NPC dialogue, or “begin the mission” dialogue, or “contact dialogue.” But that’s it. If I want to read a great story, I’ll go to Borders and buy a book, not log into City of Frickin’ Heroes! If I want to write, I will launch Microsoft Word and type, not log into City of Frickin’ Heroes! And truth be told, guess how many of my in-game friends RARELY paid any attention to what the actual text was associated with any mission, anyway? A LOT.

Fifth, a lot of people won’t bother creating missions, because it will be too much of a chore. Guess how many of my in-game friends don’t go into minute detail with the costume creator? Guess how many of my in-game friends don't use the SG base editor to either create their own base or revise a current base? Guess how many of my friends log into the game just to have fun by blasting or smashing stuff since this is, in fact, a comic-book-based action video game and they want to unwind and need a break from “work” (whether that is a job, studying, or taking care of the kids, etc)? A LOT.

Sixth, it will be filled with the usual horrific bugs and egregious exploits that will necessitate shutting down the MA entirely, and possibly even the game, for extended periods of time for emergency fixes. Merits. ‘Nuff said.

[/ QUOTE ]

So let me see if I can distill your comments down a bit:

1. You expect a lot of people to enjoy the mission architect immensely, and pour significant amounts of their playing time into it.

2. Its an optional feature of the game that players can choose to ignore or participate in as they wish, without affecting the rest of their game play.

3. The MA will all players of any authoring skill levels to participate, and be judged on their creations by their peers.

4. You'll be able to customize the story content to the same degree as the CoX mission designers.

5. Most of the players will spend more time playing MA-created missions rather than authoring them, and for those that wish to play combat-intensive missions there will probably be authors of the same mindset that write combat-intensive missions with little or no storyline interfering with the action.

6. The quality of the MA is likely to be consistent with the rest of the game.


Thanks for the show of support! I'm sure the devs really appreciate players like yourself taking the time to express your opinions on the likely successful nature of the Mission Architect system. Its posts like yours that really brighten their day and make them appreciate the opportunity they have to continue to develop the game in directions that will continue to entertain the player community. I'll be sure to mention your fine expression of good will to the devs the next time I chat with them. Bravo sir.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So the characters in my superhero virtual reality game can play a superhero virtual reality game... <head esplodes>

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you make a mission, where your character has to make a mission?

[/ QUOTE ]


...


...


hmm...

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that it will be soemthing to play with.

The fear is that such a powerful tool results in the end of creative obligation on their part and a drying up of storytelling opportunities. We, the players will close doors on any potentially original story arc from NCNC.
They'll throw something out there and the crowd will cite a previously created arc that a player made and we'll shout in unison "seen it." And let me tell you those are some horrible words to see when your job is to keep things fresh in the story department.
You can't just give it all away. People will gorge themselves, and nothing will be left.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, let me put it this way. That very same problem is a problem I'll face as a potential Mission Architect author: potentially thousands of other players will be writing stories, and there is the real danger that after working on a story arc and publishing it, the player community will say "seen it."

It just means I have to work harder at being original. If I can deal, the professional writers at NC are probably not worried either. They have better tools, better control, and the benefit of being canonical. And they almost certainly get first crack at every new toy: new critters, new powersets, new maps, new mission technology. I wouldn't be worried if I were them.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Heres another interview, from Allakhazam, some nice insights and apparently the devs will be using the MA to make missions in the future (and that when they get new tools for it, they will be passed onto the players).

[/ QUOTE ]

So wait, if they start giving the playerbase 100% content and creative control, then what will be the reason for us to pay $14.95?

[/ QUOTE ]
Just as you are free to stop paying $14.95 per month, NCNC is free to stop allowing you access to their servers.



[/ QUOTE ]

It is not that simple and both you and I know it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure why you think its not that simple. Stop paying your subscription, and you lose access to the game servers. With that, you also lose access to anyone elses MA content and you *also* lose the ability to play your own. Without access to the game servers, your custom missions are just a bunch of text files that you can't do much with (you cannot play or test player-created content "offline.")

The MA only allows you to *add* content to the game, it does not give you the ability to bypass actually *needing* the game to play content.

[ QUOTE ]
Can we force a boss to always spawn as a lvl 54 AV? I want to make the Slax Task force truly ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you're going to have to worry about being unable to make "truly ridiculous" content. Trust me on this one.

[ QUOTE ]
Let me try again: Is the whole Mission Architect a big virtual reality?

[/ QUOTE ]

How about this: Crey and Dr. Aeon claim it is. [u]Crey[u] and [u]Dr. Aeon[u].

That leaves script openings big enough to drive Adamastor through.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, you seem to making an awful lot of assumptions about rewards.

[/ QUOTE ]
Mhm.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, you're only making one assumption about MA rewards. And its wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
But I think the MA thing should have some connection to the in-game lore, and it's pretty easy to just do a holodeck/danger room hand-wave. I don't think I'd have gone with Dr. Aeon, personally, or the focus on entertainment, but whatever. Once we get the tool, people will use it however they want.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose you could always write an MA mission that describes the true functionality of the MA system.

[ QUOTE ]
you are making nerfings NOW on something that most likely, if past experiences are any indication, will never actually happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, since I9 I have seen a marked upswing in the percentage of things hinted at that are actually implemented. I'm prepared to take Positron at his word that much more complex optional mission branching tech is coming, since there's no reason to lie about something as specific as that.

Also, badges (at least the technology behind them) have always been considered a low priority item for the devs in the past. In fact, I actually heard once quite a while ago that one of the red names was interested in working to revamp them, but the resources never really materialized. The fact that badges are *now* a high enough priority to revamp the interface for them (something Positron himself once said was potentially a ton of effort), to devote additional dev resources to manage them, and to conduct a review of all of them, strongly implies to me that something has moved badges closer to the centerline of the roadmap for CoX development.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I had heard the concerns of a few vocal badge aficionados, and I fell on the wrong side of the argument (it’s amazing, but sometimes being insulted makes you feel MORE right than you probably should).

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't self-identify as a vocal badge aficionado, I'm just vocal. While there is still residual attention on this issue, and at the risk of swimming upstream on the general current of the thread, I'd like to stick to my original guns and reiterate something I stated in a couple of places here and there. A couple of years ago, I made a comment with regard to ED and Statesman's comment that "powers wouldn't be radically changing after the I5 GDN changes." What I asked was that even if Jack didn't think that was a misleading statement, wasn't there anyone in all of Cryptic who might have warned him. I specifically said "Is there no one at Cryptic that suggested that was the case? I would have at least mentioned it in the hallway."

Positron, if you're reading, I'm sure you make a hundred little decisions every day, and it can be difficult to tell which ones are going to ultimately end up being especially noteworthy. However, I think that a general statement can be made that theoretically any change that specifically alters whether players can earn a reward, revokes a reward, or significantly alters the method of earning a reward is a potential troublespot.

Acknowledging the fact that some changes have additional special issues (Exploit-related changes) I think specifically because you and whoever else works on rewards see a ton of little details we players do not see, its very easy to get tunnel-visioned into thinking all decisions are just technical implementation decisions, and not sometimes highly consequential ones for the players. Because of course, enhancements have nothing to do with powers. For that reason, I believe its essential that there be someone "in the hallway" to warn you when a reward-relevant change might be a critical one that requires extra attention. And it can't be the people working on rewards eight hours a day. Maybe you should consider somehow circulating reward-based changes to the rest of the team for feedback, so that the rest of your devs that *don't* work on rewards have an opportunity to warn you when you're about to run into potential trouble.

They've all got their own fish to fry, to be sure, but I have to believe you have the occasional meeting among the major players for designing the game, if not everyone. An agenda item that says "we're making changes to these rewards, take two minutes to let me know if we screwed up somewhere" could head the next issue like this off at the pass. I know you have badgers and "repetitive task executors" and such on-staff. My guess is that at least one of your staff is also a reward-junkie of some kind off the clock and can at least partially represent those interests. It might end up being a very rewarding two minutes of time.

[ QUOTE ]
Here’s a bit of a teaser: We have big plans for these (and other) badges, and we really want them to mean something to your character. If you are in a dialog tree that involves creating something, we have the ability to look at your badges and see if you have taken the effort to prove yourself as a crafter. This effort would be rewarded with special options in the dialog tree that earn you better results, enable you to skip steps, etc. For this system to work, we’ll need them to be a reasonable indicator of the amount of work a crafter has put into crafting. And it’s not just dialog trees that are going to look at badges, and it’s not just crafting badges that will be looked at, so you guys can speculate away!

[/ QUOTE ]

Crimson:

If you've worked with me before, you know the ground rules, but I'm going to ... no, this is not a badge mission, jeez: isn't 604 enough already? And where exactly are you hiding them in that costume anyway? Look: if I have to give you a badge every time I need you to defeat a few Crey, I'll just send Indigo to do it already. Don't you have an ITF to run now? Sigh.

[u]Take mission from Crimson after he stops crying[u]

[u]Ask Crimson if this arc gives a souvenir instead[u]

Long overdue, I've updated the damage spreadsheet with the Shields corrections posted to the thread. I've also added a completely worthless sheet that charts the performance of the sets based on the main sheet's settings, and another slightly less worthless sheet that will calculate the diminshing returns of any attribute's Cur, Res, or Str for any archetype which I put practically zero time into making either pretty or pretty useful. It just works, at least as far as I could check. I'm afraid that's the best I can do at the moment: time constraints and general laziness combine to make it difficult to add more features for now.

I'm still thinking about updating this behemoth with some new ideas about how to measure survivability more accurately. The other day, I was thinking about attempting to quantify the true proportions of both the damage types and the attack types, but that got very complex very quickly - not because of the huge amount of data, that would just be tedious. More precisely the complexity of how attacks actually work: you might have cold defense and resistance, but there aren't just pure cold attacks. There are Ice Blasts which can be typed both smashing and cold as an attack, and have both smashing and cold damage. The tricky part is that while each damage component is resisted separately, which means the resistance numbers are independent, the entire attack is defended by the best of your smashing or cold defense, which means you don't just get smashing defense + smashing resistance and cold defense + cold resistance: you actually get the better of smashing or cold defense + smashing resistance, and the better of smashing or cold defense + cold resistance. You're usually a little better off than the component-by-component analysis suggests; sometimes a little more, sometimes a lot more (this affects sets like Willpower and especially Ice that have differing typed defense and resistance).

[ QUOTE ]
Your advantage is that you have started playing when the game was in a more advanced state than it was in the beginning.

You didn't have to deal with the same buggy missions, early-level travel issues, the lack of radio/newspapers and the lack of a difficulty slider. You didn't have to wait for the level cap to be raised to 50. You didn't have to wait for capes/auras to be introduced, or or for any number of new costumes/pieces. You didn't have to wait for APPs, PPPs, HEATs, VEATs. You didn't have to wait for respecs, the markets, or IOs.

[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't have to wait for a GM to explain what you were supposed to do in a mission like this.

Its a small world after all.


(Oh my god I can't believe I ever used that hair style)

[ QUOTE ]
Well, well. This rather neatly defenestrates all my attack chain calculations.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the flip side, its made Werner the God of Attack Chains.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Finally, we are in a particularly chaotic point in update schedule. We're beginning the transition between I13 on live and I14 (which used to be part of I13) on it's way to beta testing--always a troublesome time in the update process. We're also working ahead on things for post I14 launch (booster packs, anniversary event, etc)...as well as Issues 15 and 16. Many things going into I14 can't go into I13 without horrible consequences. Likewise with I15 and I16. So, we're currently dealing with more future builds than we ever have and more open branches as well. Trust me, it's just as frustrating for us as it is for you guys. But we'll get through it and things will smooth out. Absolute worst case scenario is by the time Issue 14 goes live...at that point one of the builds/branches we're juggling (I13) is closed for good. Pretty hopeful that things will smooth out long befor then though.

[/ QUOTE ]

PR wise you're the best thing this product has going for it, your employers should note that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, it appears no one is specifically assigned that task.