Aura_Familia

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
- It was always intended for TFs to become 'impossible' if too many people quit (that's WHY you can't add more people: it's part of the challenge).

[/ QUOTE ]

Time to reintend.

I don't want the "challenge" of a TF to be discovering that the Defender in the group is 12 years old and has to go to bed. I don't want the "challenge" of a TF to be the Tanker saying his wife is getting mad at him and has to quit. I don't want the "challenge" of a TF to be a malevolent mapserver or ISP, especially one that's not on my end.

I want the challenge of a TF to be the TF itself.

If they want TFs to be viewed in this manner by players, they need to redo every TF/SF made before I7 to look more like LRSF/STF/LGTF, in which there are between four to seven missions, with each presenting a unique challenge that actually requires a balanced team to overcome.

Not this "string of 15 paper missions followed by some lame AV" crap.

[/ QUOTE ]

Said it better than I did.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So what possible benefit could the Devs have had from suppressing it on purpose, seeing as it was obviously going to come out anyway?

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose by making the change a fait accompli, the devs might reduce the duration of complaints a bit. If it were revealed while on Test, people would naturally complain while on Test, then continue once it was pushed live. Here, they can only complain during the live phase. The devs could conceivably have kept the change hidden in the hope that the furor would die out quicker this way.

I think that's unlikely, since it would imply the devs are absolutely committed to sticking to their guns and pushing through a change they know will be unpopular. If that were the case, you'd expect them to mention it to Lighthouse in advance. :-/

I suspect this is just an unusually glaring mistake in the documentation process, but that doesn't mean it can't be deliberate. There's a reason the old saying that 'it's often easier to get forgiveness than it is to get permission' is a saying.

-D

[/ QUOTE ]

I find the mistake claim to be a little weak in this case for one reason: They already had 2 missing patch notes (the Rikti portals and the Ouroboros Welcome to Vanguard changes).

When they added those in, no one thought "Hmm, is there anything else we changed that was left out?" I find that slightly hard to swallow.

I was almost sure that this was an unintended bug in the new patch based on that. Having it turn out to be completely intended was disappointing. I'm not going to get too worked up about it because, by and large, this current crew has been pretty good at communicating with the players.

If this was an honest mistake, so be it. I'm just not buying.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really do think it was a mistake, since what took place kinda showed that Lighthouse might not have been aware at first.

With that said, for the [censored] 100th time, they need to fix their damned patch notes system.

[ QUOTE ]
That was indeed the stated intent at the time.

I that TFs have been getting shorter, and that that's a good thing. But there's a limit. They are only supposed to get So short, So easy. And where ever that line is drawn short of getting rid of TFs completely, there are people who will want them to want less commitment and time.

This is as good a place to draw the line as any.

There are many forms of challenge in a game, and 'time spent' is as legitimate a challenge for a goal as 'sufficiently minmaxed', 'can team', or 'is level x'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except they threw that out of whack with the stf.

The stf can be completed in less time than the posi tf.

That right there says right now the way tfs are viewed by the dev team is basically borked. I don't think tfs are hardcore at all.

Just some being ridiculously and unnecssarily tedious.

And I'm sorry but tediousness for tediousnes sake is NOT challange as far as I'm concerned.

[ QUOTE ]


I suspect this is just an unusually glaring mistake in the documentation process, but that doesn't mean it can't be deliberate. There's a reason the old saying that 'it's often easier to get forgiveness than it is to get permission' is a saying.

-D

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think its a consipracy.

But most definetly this is NOT unusual. After being promised that they would improve their patch notes process almost a year ago, after similar missing patch note fiascos, I'm surprised that this could happen again.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The reason it's bad in the limit is that they become the ones least affected by this change. The logic goes: slower/longer TF for more folks = higher prices for desirable pool C drops = more RMT business since they can still make large amounts of inf.

[/ QUOTE ]


Huh?

Ppl are saying that RMTers are going to exploit this TF change...

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't. When I said 'boon to farmers' I didn't say anything about RMT. If you want to create the straw man argument that everyone in this thread that is talking about farming problems caused by minimum loads is solely focused on RMT, then I guess you just might win against that false premise. Score one for you!

[/ QUOTE ]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHHAAHA

Where did I say "everyone in this thread" is saying that. I said "Ppl" as in "People" not Everyone. But look closely, because there clearly are ppl in this thread who are & were saying that RMTers are going to exploit this change.

Nice try though


Oh, and once more... No, simply No. RMT Farmers are Not going to be exploiting this change.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are being obtuse.

My SS/WP brute will easily take out a 4 man spawn of CoT with your scary Death Mage.

You think RMT Farmers or farmers in general only have fire/kins?

Obviously, you have no idea what you are talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

After reading all his/her comments I can safely say Treme doesn't know what the hell she/he is talking about. And knows jack [censored] about farming.

And news flash: death mages ain't all that. My fire/kin easily destroys groups of 2-3 death mages.

LOL, death mages.

Well glad to see I no longer have any reason to run ANY TFs/SFs (except for the STF) EVER again.

[ QUOTE ]
*snip*

[ QUOTE ]
A better, win-win way to approach this is with a "double XP temp power" that is good on your toon for X hours/days of gameplay. That way, the rush for PLing is more spread out, and regular players get to enjoy the benefits of the double XP without being shut out regularly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this being something that isn't counted down in real time. Look at the Holiday Spirit awards. I've got some toons with them left from the December 05 award.

If they do something like this I would think it needs to be done with a real-time count down. You click it and it's good for 48 hours of real time from when you click it. The code is there from the holiday temp powers like the self rez and jet pack. This *would* give people a chance to schedule it in with work schedules or what not. Make it not stackable like when they gave freespecs, only one at a time. You don't use it, you lose it.

*Edited for spelling error.

[/ QUOTE ]

AND NOT give it to everyone at the same time. Do it on a random rollnig basis.

Cause if you give to everyone who has a toon on Freedom at the same time, guess what will happen again?

The nastiness from other servers in this thread fails epicly.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm of the mind that you SHOULD NOT have access to any pve rewards without the fact that pvpers can stop you. Its a PVP ZONE. Period.


[/ QUOTE ]
And the suggestion is to change it. There is no doubt to anybody that drastic changes need to be done to PvP zones. HB's idea is a drastic change, and makes the current PvP system more friendly by adding elements to the PvP system that will add a "You have to be nice or I won't toggle to PvP mode" element to it. The idea is to get rid of the majority of the trash talk and breaking of the rules so people don't get their accounts banned. That is one of the main issues I've seen in the thread Ex created.

[ QUOTE ]

The more I read your response the more its sounds like you just want folks to be able to ignore the glaring zone warning you get about it being a pvp zone.


[/ QUOTE ]

That is exactly what should be done. Move that glaring sign into the zone so people will actually step foot into the zone instead of just passing by the entrance every now and then. Why not move those click contact mission into the zone instead of on the outside and put a flag toggle in the zone. The only thing it would do is increase the population in the zone, and if there a nice PvPers in the zone, maybe an occasional conversation along these lines

PvPer: "You want to PvP"
PvEer: "Dunno, never really tried it"
PvPer: "It's ok. I can help you out, and you don't really lose anything to try it."

would take place. That's the whole goal of revamping the PvP system. That's what we need more of.

[ QUOTE ]

To be able to get badges, nukes, shivans with no risk. Or am I wrong?


[/ QUOTE ]
If a person chooses to use PvE instead of PvP in the zone, the suggestion was to increase the amount of PvP

HB:
[ QUOTE ]

Flagging
<...>
But far more importantly this "clears the decks" so to speak in the PVP zones to add new play content.
<...>
The mood is slightly improved since gross misbehavior can be avoided and there is awareness that potential playmates might have to be talked into participating. Traffic increases dramatically, improving exposure and creating a larger pool of potential players to entice into joining a PVP session.
<...>
This also doesn't "destroy PVP" by any stretch of reality. All those who PVP will still PVP. Those who had thought about it but didn't want to make design compromises for the rest of the game will give it a second look. And those who avoided PVP zones 100% of the time are now free to enter the zone and possibly be invited (or repelled) by what they see to give it a try.
<...>
Bloody Bay
<...>
Mini Game
<...>
In PVE mode, the npc opposition can be made much much harder.
<...>


[/ QUOTE ]

Those are some important issues that he covers in his original post, and ones that I agree with. Things have to be done, and if it's not these ideas, then it will need to be others.

[ QUOTE ]

Or simply remove all pve rewards from the zone and make a new zone with all the pve rewards in them. And then make REAL PVP rewards which you get from pvping.


[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with removing PvE content from PvP. It would ruin Sirens Call (I've seen a few people post that they like the current mini game conflict with Long Bow and Aracnos).

[ QUOTE ]

How about they add to the ovbserver mode in that you can't see b-cast either or talk? Basically you You can only see what the players are doing and what powers they are using. Also add a PVP attribute type window that you can click on any two (or more) players fighting and see what powers they are using as they use them in the zone.


[/ QUOTE ]
Removing broadcast does nothing to curb the current atmosphere of the PvP zone, and eliminates the observer from asking questions about PvP. Only adding an observer bot doesn't actually get them into the zone. A reason needs to be added to improve the overall atmosphere of a PvP zone and peoples attitudes in the zones.


A point I would also like to add, basically about the flat line of increase in growth, is that the PvP environment is losing people as fast as people become interested in it because of the environment. When looking for an MMO the first thing I check is to see if they have a PvP system. The best PvP system I've seen thus far is the system WoW uses. Not necessarily the PvP/Non-PvP server, but how they actually have it set up, being able to zone into instances with PvP, and they have PvP zones chocked full of PvE element. That PvE element in the PvP zones is what needed. The one MMO that I really tried to like, but just couldn't was D&D Stormreach. They made a joke out of how a campaign can run, and had no PvP/Controversial elements to the game.

I don't want CoH to toss PvP to the way side, and start making advancements to the PvE system (blasters shooting while held) without any regard to the PvP system. But if they do something, and it doesn't work, that is exactly what will happen, and that is when I will start looking for a new MMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I don't think this idea will solve the trash talk or the atmosphere. On the contrary i think it will make it worse.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

EDIT: Also I think its highly wishful thinking to think you can change people behavior in pvp with a pvp off flag.

Also if pvp on its own is not good enough (read imablances all around) then no amount of LURING is going to save the system. The imablances themselves need to be fixed. Also enforcement of the over the top trashtalk (read sutff clearly against the EULA) should be enforced.

Also note you can CURRENTLY remove b-cast from your chat box and still send tells.

Let me test a theory here.

To address this point:

Furthermore, this does nothing to change the climate of play in the zones. It would serve as a risk-less window into an area where people are behaving pettily and showing no sportsmanship.

How about they add to the ovbserver mode in that you can't see b-cast either or talk? Basically you You can only see what the players are doing and what powers they are using. Also add a PVP attribute type window that you can click on any two (or more) players fighting and see what powers they are using as they use them in the zone. Basically an pvp zone observer mode on steroids with the explicit purpose of using it as a learning tool.

How is that for a real learning environment?

And then when you want to REALLY jump in, you head over to your base (can even add a "teleoprt to base contact button" on that observer window/attribute window to zoom your "camera" self immeadietly to the zone contact) click on a contact and turn the observer mode off, you get the standard 30 sec timer, and then you can join in with your toon.

I await your response.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather they just implemented an observer mode like in the arena. You can view the battle and learn a lot about tatics in the zone, but can't interact in anyway. Bascially no pressure at all while seeing what pvp is like. Problem solved.

[/ QUOTE ]
No pressure....and no appeal either. PVP isn't available for people to casually pick up or not at their whim. It's viewable through a porthole and still screams "stay out of my PVP zone you PVE-loving newb".

This sounds more like a thinly veiled solution for PVPers to not have to deal with PVEers than something that will expand the appeal of PVP to the general population.

Furthermore, this does nothing to change the climate of play in the zones. It would serve as a risk-less window into an area where people are behaving pettily and showing no sportsmanship.

An observer camera would be a PVP repellant, not a PVP draw.

...Granted though that this has more of sugar coating of rationale for 'PVEer Go Home' than "just take the PVE elements out of the zones entirely" does .

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm of the mind that you SHOULD NOT have access to any pve rewards without the fact that pvpers can stop you. Its a PVP ZONE. Period.

An the observer camera is used all the time in the arena for people to learn tatics with no pvp pressure.

sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. Which is why i'm against your suggestion. The more I read your response the more its sounds like you just want folks to be able to ignore the glaring zone warning you get about it being a pvp zone. To be able to get badges, nukes, shivans with no risk. Or am I wrong? Doesn't sound like you're really trying to improve pvp at all. If the idea is to give folks a feel for pvp and to have them see it with little pressure of getting attacked then why are you so against an obeserver mode?

Or simply remove all pve rewards from the zone and make a new zone with all the pve rewards in them. And then make REAL PVP rewards which you get from pvping.

[ QUOTE ]
I would love to be able to do the other villain patron missions. Don't need to switch patrons or anything, just want to do the missions.

[/ QUOTE ]

THAT would pwn.

I like this suggestion VERY much.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now think about this for a moment if you will. You've got an empath, who uses their PvE build for PvP. They will not turn on pvp mode, but will actively heal, and buff people who are pvping, while they just get to stand, unharmed by all.


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe somebody else has pointed this out, but if the PvP/PvE SwapBuildFlag is properly implemented, a PvE Empath will be unable to target and thus buff either an enemy NPC or a player flagged for PvP.

It's been done many times before in many other games. It's a rudimentary algorithm nowadays.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd rather they just implemented an observer mode like in the arena. You can view the battle and learn a lot about tatics in the zone, but can't interact in anyway. Bascially no pressure at all while seeing what pvp is like. Problem solved.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


From a business standpoint, why on earth would I want to do that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because NCSoft understands better than Cryptic ever did the importance of PvP in the MMO market.

Because they can easily see that the overall population of CoX is about as high as it is going to get with the current arrangment, and if they want to see any significant growth they will have to make some changes to the game. PvE content has been added consistantly, but has not generated growth. PvP is the one area of the game that has not recieved any significant developer attention since issue 7, and therefore is worth the effort to improve if it could be used to lure new players in and generate growth, IF DONE CORRECTLY.

[/ QUOTE ]

fixed.

[ QUOTE ]
I like the idea of the Camera bot. I believe it could be implimented AS the PVP flag. You can talk to the liason outside the zone and load in with a "Camera Bot". To Un-Camera-Bot, you click the "Exit" button at the top of the screen (Like a mission complete Exit button.)
While in Bot mode, you have the same restrictions as an arena bot.

The basic "Flag Timer" problem is taken care of, as to "Flag", you basically have to zone twice, and to un-flag, same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like it. You can view pvp but can't get the pve rewards in zone with no risk. I have no objection to this.

[ QUOTE ]
Darq_Aura wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You go there expecting pvp. You don't want pvp, don't enter the zone. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are all entitled to opinions. Even you. Still, they are just opinions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, no that's the way the zone is built. Hence the glaring warning from the contact for the zone.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except for the fact that "the way the zone is built" also includes non-PVP PVE content. So you might understand why some non-PVP players might think they could still enter, even with the warning.

--NT

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said anything about not entering? You most certainly can enter. Expecting not to get attacked though is idiocy.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You go there expecting pvp. You don't want pvp, don't enter the zone. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are all entitled to opinions. Even you. Still, they are just opinions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, no that's the way the zone is built. Hence the glaring warning from the contact for the zone.

[ QUOTE ]
I still don't understand what the the big deal is about flags. Is it that folks are envisioning people toggling their flag on and off to attack people without being attacked?

[/ QUOTE ]

I still don't understand what the big deal is about entering a pvp zone and expecting pvp.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


When did I like PvP? When it was massive event type things, where people just didn't care. And the numbers involved quickly droned out the idiots. It was chaos, but it was fun.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is kind of my point. Those times were fun not because the trash talk didn't exist, but because you were able to ignore it.

It's so easy to ignore or filter out the trash talk using the in game permisions, that it simply isn't a good argument for not doing it. It is probably the single biggest reason people raise in these discussions for avoiding PvP. It also is the single easiest thing to fix. The Devs have already provided the means to resolve that issue in game. There is nothing more they can do in that regard short of a zero tolerance policy on it with perma bans for offenses. Banning people from playing seems a bit counter productive, wouldn't you agree?

To bring it back on topic, how would adding PvP flagging reduce trash talk in broadcast, or make it less offensive? How would it have made your experience better?

[/ QUOTE ]

NO. Banning people for making racial comments and comments agains the EULA in ANY context, pvp or pve, is the perfect policy that should be enforced.

NO. Just cause you are pvping doesn't mean you get talk about some one's mom or some of the worse idiocy I've heard in places like Siren's call.

Back on topic, I think the flag in a PVP ZONE idea is a stupid idea.

You go there expecting pvp. You don't want pvp, don't enter the zone. Period.

I'd be against adding a pvp flag to a purely pve zone also.

My main objection is to being able to turn yourself off from pvp in a pvp zone.

I can never agree to that. The warning before you enter the zone is there for a reason.

If you want folks being able to observe in a pvp zone, then make it an "only affecting self" tag. That way they can't do anything till they flag themselves ON for pvp. No badges, no pve, nothing.

And once you turn on the flag you can only turn it off again till you leave the zone.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The one thing I want to know, now that Statesman is gone, is are there any plans for character advancement (i.e. more levels or Alternate advancement) for level 50 characters?

[/ QUOTE ]

More levels = No.
Alternate advancement = IO sets.

[/ QUOTE ]I don't consider IO sets as AA. It isn't good enough for me.

[/ QUOTE ]
But its good enough for me.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah I missed the 'in real time', I think ym briain is addled today.

EG:
Sorry the win goes on. Did you not get the memo that suckage is no longer part of CoX ?

(aside from MOG) *ducks and runs*

[/ QUOTE ]

MoG continuing to suck is the only thing that grounds me in reality.

[/ QUOTE ]

You might want to avoid the Training Room in the near future, then.

[/ QUOTE ]

*twitch**twitch**twitch*

/splodeyhead

Is it actually going to make sense now?

If it does then the last thing I've been asking for since beta has been granted.

I love you guys.

[/ QUOTE ]



Well that does it. Hell froze over.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that we'll be getting these things prior to i12 is completely awesome. It's things like this that remind me of why I have kept my subscription to the City of franchise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, they could easily have bundled all this up with I12 and gotten away with a thinner issue that way. I'm glad they didn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen. Now is an excellent time to be a City of... fan!

I'm *extremely* happy with this announcement.

[/ QUOTE ]



This make me very giddy. Now I'm REEEEALLY intrigued as to what is in Issue 12.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, I agree. However, while most of these e-mail addresses are unable to be reproduced by a sane person, they can by forwarded. Apologies in advance, but I've attempted to forward one or two to you, LH. Would it be possible to release a, say, GM_RMT_KILLER e-mail address that we could forward these to? As it stands now, I have to delete a dozen or so every time I log on--and they get away.

At least if I could notify someone about it, that account could be flagged for banination.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im with Dumple on this one, a "Attn Spam" address we can forward email to would be ideal.

Side note, isn't it some how possible to take legal action on these sites as a violation of some law, somewhere?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but good luck with the cost and how successful you will be. If Blizzard the 100 pound gorrilla can't stamp them out, you think a smaller mmo company can?

QR

Now THAT's the way to reply to "cov whine posts".

+5 to everyone who took this route instead of flaming the OP.