BellaStrega

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Positron was the mastermind rep...

[/ QUOTE ]

When was this? Must've missed him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Beta.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, gotcha. Accepted the invite pretty late into beta. Must've missed him in the MM forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

He and one of the other devs wrote some nice Mastermind guides, and the direct involvement led to some nice changes to MMs during beta.

One amusing point was a general discontent with people who were leveling past ten (the request was to test content from 1-10 at the time) all meanwhile Positron is talking about his level 20 or 30 or so MM.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't remeber anything about the Corruptor Rep other than the fact that he royally sucked. Nothing like Castle or Jonyu.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he posted twice. It's hard to say if he sucked because the movement of his hand was invisible.

That's not really a defense, just an "It's hard to tell if he ever actually did anything."

[ QUOTE ]
Over a month ago, Statesman announced every AT would be getting its own Community Represenatative, that they'd be looking into it "as soon as the holidays were over". The holidays are over, and nothing more has been said on the matter. Not even a "we're working on it".

[/ QUOTE ]

Castle said something as well. I don't know what's going on now, of course.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Positron was the mastermind rep...

[/ QUOTE ]

When was this? Must've missed him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Beta.

Jonyu is the brute rep, and Castle is the stalker rep. Positron was the mastermind rep, Statesman was the dominator rep, and I can't remember who the corruptor rep was. I don't know if anyone other than Jonyu or Castle are currently active. Castle has been addressing topics across multiple ATs, though, so PMing him might get a response.

My interactions with Valdermic were more limited, due to me not finding nearly as many things broken after Vyvyanne left.

Cool that he showed up to chat about it, though.

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm.

Recently I was reading the message boards for a game company that I'd played MUDs through (years ago). Apparently they're making a MMOG now. While looking through posts I came across this.

I thought, "Gee, Statesman's motto is getting around to other games...?"

But now I wonder, is it someone that worked here, someone that works there but plays here, or is it possible that States is moonlighting??

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe "soon" predates Statesman, as does "working as intended."

[ QUOTE ]
Where the hell is Manticore then?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've heard he's interviewing volunteers to test his second generation enema arrow.

[ QUOTE ]
It's all very confusing -

Aura went on to other things at NCsoft and is doing well - she says hello.

Gilgamesh went on to another game and was replaced by Arctic Sun. Awry also came on board for CoV as a web writer.

Vyvyanne went on and is lead QA for another NCsoft game.

Valdermic and Jax also went to other games. _Spiral_ is the current QACC.

Finally, today is _Nomad_'s last day with us - she has moved on to be the CC for an upcoming NCsoft game.

But yeah - I am still here with my heroes.

[/ QUOTE ]

My head is a'spinning.

Also, I miss Vyvyanne. She did awesome QA.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You might be thinking of Gilgamesh who was replaced by _Awry_.


[/ QUOTE ]

Gil was replaced by Artic_Sun..._Awry_ is the CoV writer working under Capt. Mako...I think...

[/ QUOTE ]

Captain_Mako's been quiet lately. So has Lord_Recluse.

What evil are they hatching in silence?

[ QUOTE ]
I swear, this is my most popular thread ever.

Oh yeah, and I'll add that it was nerfed since I first posted this thread. The duration was halved.

I really can't think of a more counterproductive power to use in PvP. I can phase a team's healer- and the rest of their team- for a whole seven seconds!

[/ QUOTE ]

And if they have combat jumping, they can run around at will.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

congratulations you just won an award for the most posts in a row by the same person!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Five? FIVE? Five in a row? That's...most?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey!! Shut up! I've never won anything before...



[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, you win.

[ QUOTE ]
congratulations you just won an award for the most posts in a row by the same person!

[/ QUOTE ]

Five? FIVE? Five in a row? That's...most?

[ QUOTE ]

The idea you are missing is this

You are decreasing the effectivness of the defense.

Not decreasing the maginitude of the % (again only time this would matter is for the case at hand)


[/ QUOTE ]

The idea you are missing is this: Without the debuff, brutes and scrappers have 75% tanker effectivness. If you give a stronger debuff to the scrapper than the tanker, you're throwing that balance off.

[ QUOTE ]
If Brutes resist 25% less than what a tanker resists, then the debuff from Unyielding needs to be 25% less than the Tanker version. Yes, that does make Unyielding's penalty for Brutes lower, but their resistances are lower as well. The idea is to make Unyielding's defense debuff proportional between archetypes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think he wants to admit that if every other number in the set is 75% that of a tanker's that making the defense debuff larger reduces the entire set's effectiveness beyond that 75%.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You donot get it. Honestly have you even taken a statistics course?

You are throwing these equations that are basic misunderstandings from students entering statistics and saying they are right when you are wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I may go to Hell simply for acknowledging your existence, but:

You're coming at this discussion without a strong understanding of how primary powersets are intended to work in comparison to secondary sets. Specifically, how brute/scrapper sets have 75% of the base effectiveness of tanker sets. If it worked as you say it should, invuln would be at a noticeable disadvantage for brutes and scrappers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Every defensive set for brute/scrapper is at a disatvantage compared to a tank.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why I might go to Hell for talking to you.

I didn't say "invuln would be at a noticeable disadvantage for brutes and scrappers compared to tankers." I meant at a noticeable disadvantage compared to other brute or scrapper secondaries.

[ QUOTE ]
Now tell me why would the devs would make it so that unyeilding gives an advantage to brutes when every other move and sets gives them a disadvantage???


This is why it is the same. They did not want to give brutes a better defense for this move compared to a tank. That would be unbalanced.

But instead of doing the math I said... (likely do to excessive code to do so) They simply left them the same for - defense, and gave tanks the advange from the other parts of the toggle.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see you don't understand the concept of "compounding."

Heck, kudos for:

* Stacking Ice, Stone, and Dark armor
* Improved fear (cower vs. flee)
* Kheldians
* Newspaper tech
* Getting cell phone numbers faster
* Reworking defense to scale
* Communication
* Reducing Dark Armor's particle effects
* Reducing Dark Armor's sound looping
* Removing toggle dropping from Ballistas
* Looking at the PVP toggle drop mechanic
* Letting me name the 10,000 post title.

Probably several more, but hey.

[ QUOTE ]

You donot get it. Honestly have you even taken a statistics course?

You are throwing these equations that are basic misunderstandings from students entering statistics and saying they are right when you are wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I may go to Hell simply for acknowledging your existence, but:

You're coming at this discussion without a strong understanding of how primary powersets are intended to work in comparison to secondary sets. Specifically, how brute/scrapper sets have 75% of the base effectiveness of tanker sets. If it worked as you say it should, invuln would be at a noticeable disadvantage for brutes and scrappers.

[ QUOTE ]
It does. Like I said, it doesn't sound like an official comment, it's just too unreasonable. Before taking it seriously, I'd like to hear a confirmation of this by a different dev, to be honest.

I mean, KO blow at 8? But, uh, what if you... I don't know, not pair up SS with INV? Is Whirling hands the balance for an EM/Inv brute? Or does this mean that secondaries are balanced with specific primaries in mind?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's an example. In general, brutes get good attacks long before tankers do, but again, it's just emphasizing part of the question which wasn't really a question.

I also don't think Jonyu responded as he did to obfuscate the issue. I think the response does make it clear that the devs feel that Unyielding's penalty is balanced for brutes, scrappers, and tankers.

[ QUOTE ]
I may have jumped the gun on Jonyu there a bit, but it does get irritating to have red names changing their tune at any time it suits the point they wish to make.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I don't think he was being inconsistent. I think he just emphasized the least important part of the question - I don't think anyone is bothered that brutes, scrappers, and stalkers get status protection later than tankers.

[ QUOTE ]
How does this coincide with Statesman's comment that at higher levels, three +3 minions (normal invincible spawn) = 1 hero?

It means Invincible needs to spawn higher cons, or (as some have suggested in the past) needs to promote mobs up a rank (spawning LTs instead of Minions, and so on), or in some other way be more difficult than it currently is.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would break the difficulty scaling and do so arbitrarily. It would also deprive people who try to push the limits of the ability to run invincible eight-person missions (with all eight in the mission defeating stuff), something that should be possible with teamwork and good builds.

[ QUOTE ]
The highest difficulty setting shouldn't just mean "yay, more XP!"

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't. Unyielding can easily provide more xp faster, depending on what your build is best at handling. Fighting +3s can take long enough that the higher xp rewards are offset by the time invested.

[ QUOTE ]
AFAIK, moving the line in the post SO game to three +2 or +3 Minions instead of +0s was a concession on the devs' part because the amount of nerfing needed to restore balance to the intended level was seen as prohibitive. I5 and I6 were clearly intended to push the game's balance back in the direction of the intended level, if not all the way back to it, and players should not be surprised if such efforts continue.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think we've seen any indication that the devs don't want anyone to be able to solo invincible. That's a guideline you came up with to justify nerfherding. The only actual statements we have is that Statesman acknowledged that players should be able to handle 3 +3 minions at higher levels. Doc_D had to resort to a much older statement to claim that it somehow trumps the later one.

[ QUOTE ]
Which is how MMOs work -- the mobs gain power faster than the players. The fac that this is a superhero game does not trump that principle.

[/ QUOTE ]

In WoW (which is not a difficult game, but people often criticize it for adds being fatal when soloing), my lower level characters can typically solo stuff up to a level or two higher with a bit of difficulty, but my upper level characters can solo multiple equal-level enemies or handle elites or normal enemies that are 4-5 levels higher.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We do have evidence that Statesman stopped talking about things in the future that may change though. [IE: Giving a sugjection to slotting 5 SO'sdurring I5 knowing that they were working on ED]

My contention is that in the 04/05 post he was speaking to the "current" situation. In reguards to an "undesierable" activity, streetsweepping and not doing mission. To get the "chalange" of what they can find on the streets it's "OK" that they find it in missions on Invincible.

But if you read posts again, he states clearly in both that starting when the characters get SOs they "outstrip" [he used that word in both posts] the Mobs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is why ED, but doesn't necessarily imply anything about whether 3 +3 minions are supposed to be an impossible fight at 35+.

My contention, in other words, is that you're interpreting his posts selectively, ignoring anything that might imply the balance goal shifted between the first post and the later post - either because you want to assume the worst about his motives, or because it gives good leverage to nerfherd.

If they nerf across the board yet again in issue 7, I guess you were right. However, I'm not going to partake of this avant-garde quote game where what someone said first counts for more than what was said most recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not "nerfherding," just being realistic. There will be nerfs in Issue 7, and 8, and every other Issue.

And while you think I'm being selective, I think you are dismissing the idea Statesman could have been speaking to the current situation in reguard to the second post, or that he couldn't have changed his mind in the time since the second post. The time between the 2 posts is 7 months, and 9 since the second one.

[/ QUOTE ]

It first came up in response to someone asking if it was reasonable to have characters fight higher (relatively speaking) enemies at higher levels, and Statesman basically said, "Yes! It's reasonable to progress to 3 +3 minions in higher levels." His next mention included that assessment.

[ QUOTE ]
FYI:
There is also a Jenkins character who makes an appearance in the game ‘Halo’.
The Master Chief finds Jenkins’ helmet, and plays back the recording on the helmet-cam.
We see the final moments of Jenkins and his squad as they are attacked by aliens.
Jenkins panics like a CoH S.W.A.T. officer, starts to run away, and dies.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, which is funny in retrospect, given that Halo was out a couple years before WoW.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For those that played WoW you know who Leeroy Jenkins is. Guess who he works for. yep Arachnos. 2nd the guy is an idiot, about as much an idiot as that woman whos name escapes me that works in Atlas MAGI that lost every single magic item to the CoT, and the hero had to go retrieve it. Sometimes just 2 missions later.

For those that don't know Leeroy Jenkins, well do a search on WoW Leeroy and you will find a nice little movie about idiots in MMO games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Acctualy, he isn't the famous Leeroy Jenkins. He's acctualy just Jenkins and was spawned from a thread where someone wished you could work your way up the Crimal ladder by working for each gang and it turned into a thread of jokes where a criminal, a first called you and was later named Jenkins. He worked for every gang and inevitably quit them or gave his two weak notice. In a patch the Devs renamed the Wolf Spider at the end of Breakout Jenkins as a response to that thread, alot like the Kill Skuls badge.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I created Jenkins before that thread started (I always assumed that the Jenkins in that thread was referring to the one in the tutorial mission).

Well, I shouldn't say "I created"... he was definitely inspired by a certain internet movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is consistent with my recollection, having rescued Jenkins on the second day of closed beta.