-
Posts
705 -
Joined
-
I'm glad. I really enjoyed that show, even if Cheetara risks making me semi-furry.
The animation studio appears to be the same one that did Avatar The Last Airbender. Now, cheesy animation like that in Adventure Time can work, but I would like to see shows with more detail and quality put into the artwork. This show fulfills it quite nicely.
(Wonders if it is the same writers, too.) -
I am reminded of Fahrenheit 451 by this. Both effective and scary the idea of a robotic attack dog is.
-
Quote:Explaining the purpose of questions is not a counter-example. If you take the rule of thumb for this situation and continually apply it over and over again you end up with a ridiculous outcome. The issue then becomes about whether or not you should ask the question about whether or not an idea is O.K., and this continually pushes the line further. No, what is important is the threshold for when something is actionable and something isn't in respect to the GMs of CoH. There must be a debatable line where the threshold can be crossed, and if this line exists then it must be possible for someone to be uncertain of this line, and finally it must be possible for someone to ask a question about the location of this line. The rule of thumb then forms a conundrum: it applies except when it doesn't. That is no help.Right, that's exactly the kind of counterexample I was saying is totally irrelevant, because the rule of thumb is for this specific situation. If you're creating a character that you think might be offensive (terrorists are funny!), somebody out there will probably think it is definitely offensive (thanks for that reminder of deep personal real-world loss while playing a video game!).
Sure, but that doesn't particularly contradict the first rule of thumb, which is that if you're worried about it, someone else will probably be legitimately offended. If it isn't offensive at all, you wouldn't be worried about it.
The rule when combined with the first creates a very big problem: You have to be worried about all of your toons, since being generic'd by an easily offended individual is an inevitability under that standard. The inverse is also true: It is possible to be generic'd and not be worried about your toon. So again, this is no help. What really contributes to the thread are things like these:
Quote:I know one player, after 7 years of naming all his characters with an everyday word, that is now left the game because of GM overreaction to a petition. What is worse is that he belongs to the racial group that the word is taken as a slur against. He had fought (and won) this battle a few years ago, and now the GMs have gone back on their promise to leave this player alone about this naming convention of his.Quote:(iv)You may not select an Account ID, NCsoft Message Board ID, a Character ID and/or Team designation, or provide any communication or information on any Message Board, that NCsoft, in its sole and absolute discretion, deems to be vulgar, threatening, racist, sexist or otherwise offensive, including but not limited to references related to any religion or deity;
Quote:Or you could assume that I was advising you that making a thread specifically to 'draw ire' (which IS what you said you were doing) might, in fact, violate the forum rules. The rules don't make exceptions for doing so as a demographic study. You weren't going to get a meaningful sample size anyway.
There was no malice intended on my part. I didn't actually report the post and I wouldn't have reported that name if I saw it in game (a name has to be REALLY bad before I do that.)
This is the last post I will be making in this thread. My honest advice to you is to not post further either and just let the thread die.
The easily offended are also kind of gauged to see the likelyhood of a toon getting petitioned. If all I got in responses was "Yeah, it might get petitioned, but I wouldn't petition you", then I probably would've made the toon anyway since no one would have had a problem with it. As for the forum rules, I haven't seen anything in this forum to show that Moderators cater heavily to the easily offended. This is also the reason why I am not going all "tattle tail" every time someone says something condescending.
Quote:1. I believe that you have made or intend/intended to make this character, what I'm suggesting is that you know full well that it will offend people and most likely get genericed, but you're asking anyway because you need to justify it, possibly in order to dodge genericing (my goodness that's an awkward gerund), or just to set yourself up as a victim.
2. I'm really done with this thread. I'll be over in General Discussion, since you're already up on the cross.
2. Because no one on the internet has ever been wronged. Ever. And people have never been rude to someone in a matter that was not a direct insult. Never.
Well, Tenzhi, I asked about it because right now my account has itself a "perfect record" regarding these thing. Though I don't think there is anything bad that happens if you get a toon generic'd, I haven't heard anyone explicitly say that there wasn't anything else that could happen from it, so I err on the side of caution. -
-
Quote:I suppose I could list all of the posts that I thought were cool, while listing all of the reasons why they were cool. However, last I checked, no one is contesting that (stay with me now), and also I did give a nod to the posts that I liked. I could also suppose that GMs aren't influenced by the posts of people in the thread when they review it, but many past experiences has taught me that they are.No, it wouldn't be better. What the hell is wrong with you that you think it is?
Blood, all I'm seeing from you is a lot of nitpicking over details and generally being argumentative (listing people whose responses you didn't like? seriously?), which is clearly what spawned this thread to begin with. You're obviously trying to justify this to somebody (GMs, yourself, I dunno).
Man, I should have just stuck with my original response because I don't even
Case 1 was the first reply to this topic, and continually set the tone. But wait, you're convinced I'm trolling. Do you think I am simply lying when I say that I haven't made the toon? Because there is, like, no good that can come from that. What am I supposed to say? "No"? You have to understand that just sitting around accusing someone of endlessly lying does nothing more than aggravate the situation and insult the accused.
Quote:Hey, I appreciate how you cut out most of my post (despite it already being quite short) to make it look more condescending. In case you've forgotten, here is your original post:
I didn't see any mention of how fun you find it in there, or whether it would be "worth it". The only question in the whole post is asking whether NCSoft is "cool with that". We answered: no, they are not (and we aren't, either). In fact, this is the same point I made in my previous post: that people were responding to the question you actually asked, instead of the question you then started claiming you'd asked. In short, you're hearing about the process so much because it answers the question you posed.
Lastly, the "if you have to ask, don't do it" rule of thumb applies specifically to this kind of problem: if you think the character might be offensive, somebody out there thinks the character is DEFINITELY offensive, and will report you for it if you ever meet. It's not a rule for life in general, and attempting to cite counterexamples from elsewhere is a bit silly.
Second, I never "claimed" to have asked a different question. That second post is a little more background information as to why I had wanted to make the toon. Hence, why I opened up with "The reason why I asked is..." on my second post in the thread. Allow me to reiterate all of the subsequent posts that occurred prior to this thread becoming "argumentative":
Quote:The name is actually a parody of Admiral Akbar from Star Wars. His catchphrase is going to be "It's a trap!" and everything.
The reason why I ask this isn't just because I probably should avoid it, but because it sounds like I would have a really fun time with this and I really want to do it. Everyone gets a kick out of my joke toons, and last I checked everyone still gets a kick out of Achmed the dead terrorist.
Quote:The rule of thumb isn't that simple. There is an equation to it; how much you will enjoy something is weighed against the potential consequences of that act as follows.
F(P1) - C(P2) = A
Where F is the potential fun you'll have, P1 is the probability of that fun happening, C is the consequences from that action, and P2 is the probability that you'll have to endure those consequences. If A > 0, the act occurs, and if A < 0 or A = 0, the act does not occur. This is a not-so-basic mechanism for weighing deviant behavior in individuals. Unfortunately I read the equation a long time ago, so I have a strong feeling I have butchered it from the thesis I originally read it in.
Though if I just need a name change, I suppose I could go with it. It'll be hard to match the genius of the exploding fish military captain.
Explaining the process for how petitions are filed and run does nothing to answer the question. If you view them standalone, they contribute nothing to the process of affirming or denying. I don't need to know exactly how food is digested to know if it is healthy, I don't need to know exactly how a car runs in order to be old enough to drive one, I don't need to know how to run a typerwriter to know whether or not a book is good, I don't need to know how a house is built to buy one, I don't need to know M-theory to know that a stone falls when I drop it, and likewise I don't need to know how a petition is filed and actioned to know whether or not a particular concept will be petitioned. How anyone would think otherwise baffles me, and how anyone would assume I don't know what happens baffles me more so since it is the first sentence of the original post in this thread.
The rule of thumb here doesn't apply, because there have been multiple cases in my life where, after being unsure and asking, that something was O.K. The whole point of asking is when things fall into a gray area and you want to know which side of the gray line it falls. Another "rule of thumb" is that out there somewhere in this game is going to be a player who will take offense to something that isn't really offensive and will petition it, and it will not be acted upon because the GM will see that there isn't a problem there. So to that end, the fact that a question is asked does not answer the question. -
My vote goes for more advertisement. The biggest issue with CoH and more players is that I never hear about CoH. Ever. I don't see commercials, I don't see ads on websites, I don't read about it in the paper. Occasionally I'll see a review or something... when I get directed to it from these forums. The biggest obstacle to getting players is actually getting players to see that this game exists, and is a viable option for their free time.
-
I think this suggestion is pretty cool. There are two ways in which I could use this. First, for those instances when I wonder just how unrealistic the proportions of the female characters are. Second, for my natural characters, since I like to be able to gauge their strength based on weight class. Don't ask why, but it is kind of important to me.
Quote:This. So much this! Something that has annoyed in this game is how all of the NPCs are seven feet tall. When I made my characters, I made them to have appropriate heights, with my tallest being 6'7". That is quite tall for any regular person, but in this game it is like he's just an average guy.Yeah I think the only thing the character creator needs to make it better is two things:
1) An actual output of the exact height.
2) All NPCs to be resized so that they have more normal uniform heights making it easier to know if we will have a tall or short character by comparison.
Now, normally players make their characters tall in MMOs where they can do so, so I can understand why the game made be made tall. This doesn't sit well for anyone who doesn't make a 7' sparkling Adonis. -
That is... just awesome. Nothing quite like an army of 25.
-
I'm working on making one of AT to 50, too. Though they are my first characters, and also the first of all of the ATs that I am trying. I'm doing it because I"m kind of neurotic like that, and also I'm working by themes instead of actual powersets. Sometimes I get good combos, but sometimes I don't. Running a Beam Rifle/Darkness Manipulation blaster right now, and they do not go together...
My best advice for "fun" sets is to use sets that kind of go with each other. If that doesn't work, go with the sets that have no counterparts and are extremely weird. -
O.K. No respect, case 1:
Quote:This statement implies so many insulting things it is hard to explain them all. First, by stating that I am not using "common sense" it is accusing me of being an insincere idiot. By stating that I already know that the players will be upset about the character, it is assuming that I am trolling the forums and am going to troll the entire game in general. By having to elaborate over every single little step about how something gets reported and actioned, it assumes that I do not know how the report system works, he is implying that I am either ignorant of the entire system, or too stupid to figure it out. Tally up the marks, and see just how rude Snowglobe is being in just two sentences.Generic Rule: If you have to ask, you probably should avoid it.
Edit:
Come on, use some common sense, you already KNOW people will be upset about that character. It is bound to be reported, and bound to cause GM action against the character.
Of course, this doesn't answer my question. That whole "Ask = No" mentality doesn't fly because there are many instances in my life where I have asked, and it has been O.K.. Ergo, the whole point of asking.
Case 2
Quote:And I'm saying that a single complaint will be acted on. Especially a racial slur combined with the Star Wars reference. The GMs will not care how much fun you are having. What you are suggesting would be a clear violation of the EULA, and they would have to act if they were presented with a petition.
Case 3
Quote:Right, so there are two reasons to generic the character rather than just one. If you make this character, it will get reported, and generic'd. Maybe the first GM won't report it, but one of them will. It's a sure thing.
Case 4
Ya think? Missed the point again about "rule of thumb", but this is the point where it becomes redundant to ridiculousness. I never asked how people get petitioned, I never asked why people get petitioned, and I never asked what happened when people get petitioned. I asked if the name and character concept is too much. So why, pray tell, and I hearing about the process so much? It certainly isn't because people have assumed I am an intelligent person who understands the system and am aware of it's inner workings.
Case 5
Quote:Actually, the rule of thumb is quite simple: Their service, their rules. It doesn't matter how much fun you are having. Someone harassing another player may be having fun, but it is against the "parks" rules, so they are acted upon.
Making excuses also doesn't protect you from GM action.
I'm guessing that you've already made the character and are seeking to justify breaking the rules. If so, go somewhere else, because you won't find much (if any) sympathy on the forums for a blatant rules violation.
Case 6
Quote:You also shouldn't bother asking a question if you don't really want to hear the answers.
And this summarizes the dis-respect from the first page. Now, there were plenty of posts that weren't an attempt to debase me. There is no doubt about that. But of course, the issue here isn't about whether or not there respectful posts. The issue is whether or not there are disrespectful posts, which Forbin denies exists. Now, on to page two.
Case 7
I can assume that Morbid just didn't understand me when I mentioned the whole shifted demographic perception and gauging viable responses to extrapolate to the player base. I can also assume Mordid did understand and is just being malicious. That is a gray area.
Case 8
Quote:Feel free to make what you want, but if you get generic'd over something blatently offensive (even if you can't see it), don't come crying on the forums about it.
And the implicit disrespect in Forbin's post makes my final case 9. Though since this is directed at Forbin, I'm not sure that I really need to prove how rude he has been. It should be implicit, since that post did nothing to contribute to the thread other than be a dig against me by setting up a false dilemma between troll and liar.
Now, since people have posted things while writing this, I will now get to those posts.
Pretty much, yeah. After post 15 this thread ceased being about a fishy mastermind.
Quote:Holding a terrible racial caricature up as an example of something that is okay to do is not the best way to bolster your argument.
Now to end it, the following posts prior to this rather ridiculous premise I have to dispel *were* respectable: #3, #5, #8, #13, #16, #19, and #22. The posts #12, #14, and #18 were funny. No comment on any posts not mentioned. -
Quote:It's the inverse of that; he's a terrorist first, and since there is a correlation between terrorists and the middle east, the association follows through. As to whether or not it is a bad idea, Achmed the dead terrorist and all of his popularity say no, it is not a bad idea. Especially when done comically.I'm sorry but
do you honestly not see where equating a terrorist with a person of Middle Eastern descent and/or vice versa is offensive and honestly a pretty terrible thing to do
I realize I'm sinking this thread just by asking but seriously
seriously
Quote:Rule of thumb has nothing to do with it. That type of name is forbidden by the company.
(iv)You may not select an Account ID, NCsoft Message Board ID, a Character ID and/or Team designation, or provide any communication or information on any Message Board, that NCsoft, in its sole and absolute discretion, deems to be vulgar, threatening, racist, sexist or otherwise offensive, including but not limited to references related to any religion or deity;
It is a common approach to juxtaposing a sample against the population as a whole. The parameters of any particular sample need to be taken into consideration, and as it happens the forums are pivoted toward negativity. Therefore, the response on the forums will be more negative than the in-game response. This needs to be taken into consideration as well as anticipated. Of course, expected more negative responses than the standard gaming population isn't against the rules. Though so far the reaction has been a lot stronger than I expected. That I will admit. Even Forbin has to go all "He's just an idiot" on me. And seriously, how many times does someone have to say "You'll still get reported" before they realize it has already been said.
Of course, the thread is no longer about the name anymore. So now, since apparently everyone is "respectfully answering" my question, I'm going to have to prove that no, they are not. -
I see this thread is still going. I have already abandoned the project for now, and made another toon. However, a lot of things said here just irk me... It is like you guys are taking it personally and are all panicking and stuff.
Quote:There is something interesting about the demographic of players who go to forums. Mostly they are made up of people who complain about things, and because of this a lot of negativity rides in the air any time anything of this nature shows up.Yes it is. A 'rule of thumb' is by definition simple and not universally true. You also shouldn't bother asking a question if you don't really want to hear the answers.
I didn't make this thread to see whether or not the idea drew ire, but how much ire it will draw. There are always those people who are going around looking for something to ruin their day (and boy did they show up), so by ignoring them and gauging the response of the rest of the people here, I can get a rough estimate of how the general playerbase will react to the concept.
"Rule of thumb" falls into the same category as "common sense" here in which it is little more than subjective on the manner. At least it isn't as derogatory and useless as "common sense" though.
Quote:Ya, if you got a fish headed guy you call Akbar you are toast. I had a couple days e-mailing back and forth with GMs over my character "Zerg". In the end I was approved, and the GM said specifically it was because I was not (and there is no way to!) make him look like the Zerg race. But if You name a character Adm Akbar and make him a fish? Like CoH needs a Lucasfilm lawsuit. NOT! In fact, I am kindly asking you to delete that. Please.
Quote:If this is true, why put "Allahu" in it? And why spell it "Akbar" instead of using the Star Wars spelling of "Ackbar"? And to be honest, quite a few Star Wars characters' names and characterizations have been considered offensive -- I wouldn't use them as a role model. Name him Admiral Salmon Head, or Admiral Itzat Rahp, instead.
Ackbar with a C is one letter too long. Otherwise, I would've rolled with it.
For all complaints about the equation: That isn't about whether or not the toon would get reported. It is why the whole "rule of thumb" thing isn't helpful. One of its caveats, if you will. -
The rule of thumb isn't that simple. There is an equation to it; how much you will enjoy something is weighed against the potential consequences of that act as follows.
F(P1) - C(P2) = A
Where F is the potential fun you'll have, P1 is the probability of that fun happening, C is the consequences from that action, and P2 is the probability that you'll have to endure those consequences. If A > 0, the act occurs, and if A < 0 or A = 0, the act does not occur. This is a not-so-basic mechanism for weighing deviant behavior in individuals. Unfortunately I read the equation a long time ago, so I have a strong feeling I have butchered it from the thesis I originally read it in.
Though if I just need a name change, I suppose I could go with it. It'll be hard to match the genius of the exploding fish military captain. -
The name is actually a parody of Admiral Akbar from Star Wars. His catchphrase is going to be "It's a trap!" and everything.
The reason why I ask this isn't just because I probably should avoid it, but because it sounds like I would have a really fun time with this and I really want to do it. Everyone gets a kick out of my joke toons, and last I checked everyone still gets a kick out of Achmed the dead terrorist. -
I figure I might as well ask this here before I devote time into making this toon just to be generic-ed.
I am going to make an MM named Admiral Allahu Akbar, and he's blatantly going to be a middle-eastern terrorist. No hiding it. I am doing it largely as a joke toon made for laughs, but also because it compliments one of my other toons nicely. Just wondering off-hand if NC soft is... cool with that. -
I haven't heard the lolstalkers sentiment in awhile. I think the ATO proc helps with this, since the chance to auto-hide can be extremely helpful. Currently I have it so I can fire off an AS from hide each time it is charged with no need to use placate. That whole "hit an enemy for 1000 damage every 13 seconds" thing tends to draw respect, and the pulsing mag 5 terrorize is a plus.
The other day I ran a +4 LRSF, and since I figured it would come down to be an 8 on 8 epic showdown with good and evil and for some reason everyone brings their corrupter to these things, I decided to host it with my KM/Elec Armr stalker. First person to join up was another stalker; a StJ/???. The whole time I was forming it and during the whole run through, not one person mentioned something about stalkers. When I was forming it earlier (failed run, since half the team d/ced and didn't log back in), no one mentioned anything about stalkers then, either. We just ran through it, stalker-ing it up all over the place, and it was a great run. -
You'd be amazed how much DPS is a factor when you decide you want to be big and bad and try to solo Nightstar in the BAF trial. It isn't just about min/maxing; it is about pushing yourself and your character harder than in the past. Making them better than the were; stronger, faster, smarter. Character growth doesn't stop at 50. As you roll with better players and better teams, more is expected of you. As you grow board of the +0/x1 runs and push the limits further, the demands continue to rise. That critical threshold where you move from the team supporting you to you carrying the team, that moment when there is an ambush or a hard enemy and you can turn to your teammates and go "Yeah, I got this. Don't worry" and you actually can handle it. That time where everyone is dead... BUT you, and you fend off the enemies and save everyone. There just isn't a feeling like it.
I am going to still be keeping placate in all of my builds that have it, however it is now going to be a one-slotted power used mostly for mez instead of the big beefy numbers. I just find myself in too many situations where there is an enemy that I want to stop attacking me for whatever reason. Also, I think all of my sets still have powers where using placate is beneficial. -
IMO, nearly every blaster primary should have a judgement that is like it. In particular, we need sonic judgment (look me straight in the eye and tell me that symphonic radial final judgment doesn't have a nice ring to it), a psychic judgment, some kind of long-ranged weapon based judgement for tech-types, and a toxic judgment.
And that is just to start. -
The lore pets that wouldn't trigger the interface proc on my end were the Carnival of Shadows.
-
I'm actually looking forward to lift's impact damage. On my Grav/Thorn Dom, the recharge can get high enough that my attack chain becomes distortion -> lift -> distortion -> Lift to avoid the redraw that thorns has, and now that Lift is becoming one of her most effective attacks it becomes a viable chain.
-
If you want my expert opinion, the trial difficulty goes in this order:
Easy: Standard BAF, Standard LAM, Standard Keyes.
Medium: TPN, MoBAF,
Hard: MoM (both standard and master runs), MoLAM, MoTPN.
Hardest: UG (both standard and master runs), MoKeyes (if successful).
A player can do the easy and medium content with no shifts and have little problem. From there, you start to need things. As for the rankings, let me explain things in reverse on the list...
The reason why I have the UG listed as hardest is because that is one of the few trials where you can fail despite everyone doing things right. There is no immunity to the gimmicks, only actions you can take to lessen the blow. Should team makeup be particularly unfavorable, the war walkers targeting attacks can put and end to the team simply because there is no one there who is capable of standing up to it. At the end, the Avatar is still a very hard boss, even with clarions. Combine that sometimes crap happens, and Desdemona will draw aggro and get killed due to umpteen reasons. Now that people are getting the hang of MoM, the UG takes the throne as the king of difficulty.
The MoKeyes is more speculation than anything else, since I have yet to actually attempt a run. However, the badges are all incredibly difficult, and two of them are geared toward making the trial more difficult. I do not have the scale of pulse damage memorized, but getting Antimatter under 10% health at a reactor seems like it could lead to team wipes and stalling very easily. Not destroying terminals means the team's offensive output needs to be outstanding, and healing capabilities profound to avoid anyone being disintegrated. If you can't avoid being DIS at the end, going for the MO would spell defeat for the team.
MoM's is a "perfect storm" for difficulty. Heavily focused on psionic damage means that players take a ton of damage, the purple patch ensures that damage output is hindered and defenses shredded, and each AV has gimmicks that can wipe the team. The inability to use the hospital means that mistakes compound quickly, and player losses quickly culminate into a slippery slope of destruction. However, by following precise instructions and knowing the tactics, a PUG of 51+ can complete the trial. Thankfully the trial is designed to let players give instruction.
MoLAM is rarely attempted, but it is essentially running a LAM under all the conditions that would normally lead to failure. To get the badges, you have to do specific things that end up making it so you can't use either pacification grenades nor the molecular acids, causing adds to build up quickly against an unstoppable wall of an opponent. Without good coordination and well constructed team, a league will be overwhelmed by the sheer numbers and raw power of the IDF.
MoTPN is also rarely attempted, but the rise in difficulty ascends this trial into hard territory. The reason why "all inside" runs seem to work so well is that it is idiot tolerant; with 24 players running about doing terminals, there's a good chance that some of them know what to do. To do MoTPN, you need to split the team 3-ways at one point, thinning the numbers. Though this is more effective, it requires upmost coordination and also requires that all people know what exactly what they are doing. This turns the trial from idiot tolerant to idiot prone; those guys who never bothered to pay attention escalate from a miner nuisance to a serious threat. -
I thought that might be it. I didn't see anything listed in the power specifics so I wasn't sure what could have been causing it.
-
Something very off that I have noticed is that while playing on my widow who normally has 54 range defense, 60 melee defense, and 50 AoE defense if I go into any form of combat the defenses drop by about 8 points each. Looking at all of the individual buffs in combat attributes, none of them vanish or change the moment I enter into combat, and yet their sum is inexplicably reduced by about 8 points.
As of late I have been submitting way too many bug reports for game mechanics that I just didn't understand right. My question is this: are the defenses for widows supposed to drop when they enter into combat? If so, why would this be happening?