BellaStrega
-
Posts
2397 -
Joined
-
Well, I mean I found raid gear in WoW was huge for soloing, but needing to be in a raid to get it didn't seem to ever be a bad thing. The closest you can come to soloing to get that content is using the instance queue, which actually works fairly well.
I'm not arguing that "just because something's always been done a certain way that means it's optimal design or a good idea." What I was saying is that on this particular issue, the incarnate trials were not a departure from past design philosophy, but rather an expansion of it.
Point taken on the boosts from the other slots. I recalled people talking about the shifts themselves, which struck me as strange because of how they're limited. -
One thing about ally support is that everyone simply performs a lot better with ally support, not just blasters. Removing the necessity certainly does not remove the luxury. While my scrapper can solo groups intended for large teams and do so fairly quickly, she still manages a lot better on a team with even one defender. Other teammates remove from my personal overhead on managing my character. Of course, she's not at the point where she's soloing risk free at the levels I set her to, and I suspect other powerset combinations with better IO sets and more incarnate slots (not hard, she only has the alpha slot) probably could.
I would like to see more control in blaster sets. I think the inspirational characters for blasters (Iceman, The Human Torch, etc) tend to have access to control abilities, if not outright defense. -
Quote:Totally. I linked the entire show mostly because some people seemed to kind of dig the outfit.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Most of those are not too strange, as fashion goes, but I picked the one that above all others looked like our costume editor exploded onto someone.
Also, I was impressed with the duplication of said outfit in the costume creator. -
I'm a bit confused about the response to Arcanaville's comments. I don't get that she's putting up straw men or using the negative argument that best suits her. Her points are correct about game design in general and CoH in specific.
A lot of stuff over the years has been locked into team content, and when players worked out how to solo a lot of it, that wasn't really intended behavior or functioning. I don't see how the Incarnate system is a departure from earlier attempts. If anything, setting it up as league(raid)-style play strikes me as consistent with decisions made as far back as the purple patch.
Also, the +2 and +3 shifts only work in incarnate content anyway, yes? If you get +1, you've shifted as far as you're going to in the vast majority of soloable content. The incarnate slots make a big difference on top of that, but they're not particularly necessary for that solo content, are they? -
Quote:Haha, post count has nothing to do with being an introvert. I am an introvert (as in I score 100 introvert on MBTI and I avoid people in real life as much as possible) but I participate a lot in online discussions, and I ended up being responsible for 10,000 posts being the "Forum Cartel" title (I don't know if titles still work that way) by virtue of being first to hit P10K. It's simply easier than socializing face to face for a variety of reasons. I also do like to team because it changes gameplay in ways that I enjoy, which aren't necessarily social (I love rolling +3-+4 on a 4-8 person team).Originally Posted by Ultra_Violence
I agree with original poster but not for quite the same reasons. From my post count it is fairly obvious I am not exactly an introvert. I do however prefer playing the game solo. I would like to also say it is nice to see that MOST of the replies were the same old sad song "It is a MMORPG you have to team or you should be playing off line games!"
-
Quote:Because of the way recharge bonuses work and how high base damage means a ton of damage after enhancements and buffs.Originally Posted by Android_5Point9
Why not? They could replace Rage on Brutes with Build Up, and leave Rage for Tankers. I'm not suggesting that's a good idea by an stretch, but they totally could if they wanted to.
What, numerically, makes a set just right/balanced for tankers that breaks it with brutes? How is it possible to make a set so strong you shouldn't give it to damage ATs, but is still balanced for a tanker? I have seen this logic advanced for years, but the explanations always sound like pure rationalization to me. -
Due to the way damage sets are balanced and the way buffing and IOs work, there really is no way for SS to be balanced on tankers but not on brutes (or scrappers).
-
Hmm, I disagree that blasters should be more desirable on teams than other damage dealers. The problem is that they are less desirable.
-
Quote:Thank you for the explanation. This is significantly worse than I thought it would be (and I did not have high hopes at all).Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Blasters are, and I'm not in any way exaggerating when I say this, the archetype that gets to be whatever's left after every other archetype takes whatever they want off the table. And increasingly these days, what other archetypes are taking for themselves is DAMAGE.
Hopefully, it will get addressed. Of course, I've been saying that for years. -
Quote:Here's some more pics from the same show.Originally Posted by Chad Gulzow-Man
Gonna be honest... the only thing I really have an issue with there is the boots/shoes (I can't tell if they're supposed to be one item, but it looks like pink fuzzy socks and hard orange plastic shoes.) The rest of it looks pretty flamboyant, sure, but aside from the glitter, I wouldn't say it's effeminate. Like a modern day Jack Sparrow, even.
(And no, I do not mean homosexual when I say flamboyant.)
But I'm an admittedly poor judge of fashion, which is why my wardrobe consists of teeshirts, jeans, polo shirts and khakis. -
Quote:Dame Vivienne Westwood.Originally Posted by Zombie Man
Seeing something like this makes me nauseous. What sicko thought it was a good idea to put orange and fuchsia next to each other?
-
Quote:This is what I was trying to get at, albeit more confrontationally than was perhaps wise.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
None of this has anything to do with my reaction when a dev spends their free time between landmarks trying to untangle our irrational jumble of wish lists and decides to try to give us something they think at least some of the players would appreciate. Anyone thinking that that moment is the perfect moment to address the fact that the options being provided highlight a perceived injustice in the game has in my opinion chosen extremely unwisely and I plan to give the assertion a weight as far below zero as I can muster.
-
Quote:I don't think any of the pieces are slutty since "slutty" is a subjective opinion of a woman's behavior.Originally Posted by BrandX
Witch Set isn't slutty.
I do like the Witch set, though. I've used it on three or four characters now. I was disappointed at the lack of certain other options for female characters in the magic set, however. -
Quote:It's not so much the belt as the thigh high boots and the corset and the belt and I think that about covers the clothing.Originally Posted by BrandX
I love the female gunslinger belt! Who can hate that?!
Oh, there may have been garters. I forget. -
Quote:Yeah, it doesn't really have many options. I didn't care for the fact that it was priced the same as more substantial packs.Originally Posted by Vyver
Can it be even called a "costume pack"? It's more like an accessory bundle considering it doesn't have any 'outfits'.
I wouldn't be surprised if we got a male oriented costume bundle down the line anyways.
True, and I do not think that some people will ever quite understand this.Quote:Honestly, this whole thing is less about costume piece numbers and more about...
-
I live on the west coast and have seen corsets in many social venues. Many are specifically designed to be worn as outerwear.
-
Quote:The Carnival of Light pack, for reference, has 10 costume pieces (female only) and three weapons (Carnival of Light Mace, Carnival of War Mace, Carnival of Vengeance Mace). The gunslinger pack, as it exists right now, has 29 pieces, which amounts to badass for the male and huge models and saloon girl for the female models. You are angry that female characters will have access to badass costume options just because they still have access to the saloon girl options that a lot of people didn't like in the first place.Originally Posted by Chad Gulzow-Man
I don't agree with the divide in costume content, and I've already said that I refuse to argue that point. My case is that I'd be perfectly happy if the devs decided to delete the saloon girl outfit altogether and just roll in the cowboy gear.
Let me break it down for you:- I have no problem with males getting A and females getting A.
- I have no problem with males getting A and females getting B.
- I have a BIG problem with males getting A and females getting A + B.
(And FYI, I would also have an issue males getting A+B while females only got A or B. Or at least I would have before the Carnival of Light pack... now I'd say we're pretty much owed some new stuff, but I know we're not going to get it.)
Your complaint has no merit and less substance. Let it go. You're not losing anything, you're not being hurt, you're not being oppressed. You don't even seem to understand what the complaints about the gunslinger pack in the first place were about. -
Quote:And yet here you are, complaining about it. Everything else is just catastrophizing because you don't know how many pieces will be produced for each body type in the future, beyond what's been said about doing more costume pieces for all body types and doing fewer costume pieces for female only.Originally Posted by Chad Gulzow-Man
Absolutely, yes. It's not a question in my mind of "what's in the costume bundles," it's "HOW MUCH is in the costume bundles." For every ten pieces that females get, I believe that males should get at LEAST eight.
Having an issue with the Gunslinger bundle because of the differing costume content is a completely different beast, and it's not something I'm going to argue about.
Also, the Carnival of Light pack is actually pretty small for serving as a centerpiece of injustice here, as it's one of the smallest costume packs available - the majority for females. But I believe it's all of 12 pieces? Many costume packs seem to have far more. -
Quote:This is why people are responding to you the way they are:Originally Posted by Chad Gulzow-Man
True enough. I'm annoyed over this change and the people saying I'm a whiny ***** for not liking this are just making it worse. Apparently parity is only required when boys get something new; when girls get something I just have to sit there and keep my mouth shut.
When the boys got something new and cool (gunslinger outfits) girls got saloon girl outfits, which is not - even though it is relevant to the wild west - particularly typical garb for gunfighters. People were upset about this because boys got to be badasses and girls got to be sex workers. Not just women but men as well complained (and several have spoken up in this thread).
Now that the badass pieces are being proliferated to female characters, you're complaining that female characters have some of the costume parts that male/huge characters had ever since the pack came out.
In other words, you didn't lose anything and you're complaining about not losing anything. The phrase "dog in the manger" is perfectly apt here. -
Quote:Okay, but back in the real world, what's happening is that more costume options are being proliferated to female models while male and huge models are getting the same number of costume options that they have been getting all along. In that same real world, these particular costume pieces were done on Dink's free time, as she said when she posted that thread.Originally Posted by Chad Gulzow-Man
I'm losing developer time, apparently. Given this latest development, it now means that the developers are now "wasting time" on costume options that 2/3 of the models in the game can't use, since they've decided to forgo their traditional 2/3 get A and 1/3 gets B and allowed for 3/3 to get A and 1/3 STILL gets B.
So, you're not losing developer time. What are you really losing here? What damage is being done by the decision to do this? -
Quote:Oh, I would not say that. Given some of the proposals I've seen on these forums over the years, I'd say that any ridiculous proposition you can imagine has likely been suggested and promoted at some point. I wish I could recall specifics, but there have been heated debates over whether people should be able to solo or not and calls to nerf particular ATs to make teaming mandatory.Originally Posted by TonyV
Oh, this strawman again. No one is bothered that some people like to solo.
-
Quote:Why does the other person have any relevance in how much investment someone might have in their own character? I've seen some amazingly terrible (to my perception) names out there, but interacting with the players they were as invested in their characters as anyone else.Originally Posted by Mr_Morbid
It does however require a reason that the other person involved considers acceptable. I'm not making any assumptions about the other person other than their level of interest in their character. They could be a fine, upstanding person in all other ways (again I am not the original poster who said otherwise.) Having a lack of investment in a game character isn't a moral failing.
Who the heck is E. E. Cummings? Is his poetry anything like e.e. cummings'?Quote:PPS A "conscious stylistic decision" would be a valid reason but it would still make me cringe. And the poetry of E. E. Cummings would have been much better (yes, my opinion) without his tendency to eschew capital letters. -
Quote:^^^Originally Posted by Zamuel
I think those disappointed with female characters getting more parts are probably making the wrong argument. Rather than complain about the conversion itself, especially since it was presented as "I had some free time so here's some stuff", perhaps you should advocate that the devs allow a thread for requesting the conversion of "obviously" unisex pieces that are currently gender restricted. The various martial arts bracers and the padded gloves have long been mentioned as being odd that only female characters can use them. This seems like a more productive path to the situation.
This.
Seriously, I had no idea the bracers and padded gloves weren't available for males. That sucks. -
Quote:So tell me, are you actually losing anything due to this decision? Is your quality of life in or out of game substantially reduced because female characters have a greater variety of costume options? You look like you're really reaching for a reason to complain here.Originally Posted by Chad Gulzow-Man
Hey, I've got an idea.
The most common argument here is that women have more clothing options than men in real life, so they should in the game too, right? Okay. Women's clothing costs more in real life than men's, too, so therefore all female costume options should cost more than the male equivalents from now on. -
Quote:Still?Originally Posted by Arcanaville
As an archetype, Blasters do.
I am so tempted to ask what kind of buffs they need (they do need something), but that'd be semi-derailing, maybe.