Captain Fabulous

[ QUOTE ]
Your forum rules make it illegitimate for a user to repost a technical solution received from support. Disallowing /signed is lame, as there are legitimate reasons to simply say "I agree" that aren't bumping.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. You could safely relay all the pertinent information regarding a technical solution without revealing any private communication that would otherwise be unsuitable to share in public. That's what's prohibited, private communications between the GMs/moderators and individual players. It really doesn't apply to technical support.

And com'n, the rules are *guidelines*. Of course they're not going to mod smack you for reposting support information. This is just common sense. We're not talking about the US Constitution here, it's merely forum guidelines. Follow the "spirit" of the rules and you'll be just fine.

And Arcana said it better than I ever could, but posting /signed doesn't offer any significant contribution to a discussion. Forumites are a very small % of the overall playerbase and the devs really don't need 20 people out of 200,000 to say "I agree" without adding any additional information. All it does is clog up the forums.

[ QUOTE ]
Some of these incidents (in particular the two that cause me the greatest concern) would be easily recognizable without naming names and impossible to discuss in such a manner as to remain completely non-specific. Moreover, in the past leaving things completely non-specific has always gotten a response (possible legitimately) stating that the staff had no recollection of such an event. This makes discussing past events in a completely non-specific way less than ideal and in fact wholly useless for illustrative purposes.

I do understand why it would generally be preferable, but it is not always possible while retaining meaning.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that is the case, then these would be issues not suitable for discussion in the forums.

[ QUOTE ]
One last attempt at clarity:

I'm apparently having a hard time expressing my concerns about the impartiality of moderation. Part of the cause of this is that bringing up examples of past actions involving staff which seemed to be wholly partial to one group or another even to explain why I was concerned would be a violation of the rules and cause for banning. Unfortunately, the concern itself would then be more properly taken up with board staff. In the past, I have attempted this with those who my concern regarded with little actual success or rational discussion in response. Unfortunately the stock reason given for this lack of response is that their time is limited. However, I receive multiple responses on the subject until I point out that none of these responses have actually addressed the initial question.

I have not, nor do I know of anyone who has, ever received other than a canned and non-specific response from the NCSoft support e-mail bandied about regularly as the next phase of having concerns addressed. The few times I have attempted to use it in fact I have often received responses that appeared to be in response to a completely different e-mail than the one I sent in given that they addressed a completely unrelated issue in as much as they addressed anything.

Can we bring up specific examples of past incidents in this discussion for purposes of illustrating our concerns?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is nothing wrong with non-specific examples. My understanding is the rules are there to prevent people from discussing specific incidents with specific individuals or characters that have resulted in some kind of GM or moderator intervention. It's along the same lines as to why the support staff won't provide a player with any kind of follow up information if they file a harassment/griefing petition, nor will the staff provide the accused player with the name of their accuser. There is little to nothing positive that can be gained by discussing these matters as they relate to specific people or characters.

But this is not to say you can't discuss a particular issue without naming names. In this way the discussion can focus on the issue itself and not the people or characters involved.

So if you have a concern regarding moderator impartiality you could discuss it as long as you didn't call out a particular person or tie it to a particular issue, because ultimately that only brings the conversation back to that issue and person, and not the original topic of perceived impartiality.

But if you were to leave all the specifics out and refer only to "instances in the past", then the thread is much more likely to stay on topic and be a positive discussion instead of a flame-fest.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It all seems to, after reading this entire thread, boil down to that one singular rule which offers no true guidance for our actions aside from 'don't annoy the mods'. This is my concern and has been all along. If that's truly the case, then why not just call a spade a spade and say so?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because that conveys a notion which does not underly their intent.

You want them to state that all rules are hard, fast, impartial, and inviolate.

By the nature of the goals, that is impossible. It will always be neccessary for them to use their human judgement about what is and is not acceptable, based on principles set forth in these rules. The rules encode one hard and fast rule - whatever they decide to do, based on their human judgements, it stands. Based on that one rule, its their way or the highway, because this is their house they built, and we're guests.

The rest of the rules are there to point out a few specific examples of things they're going to be looking for or types of behavior they don't want to see. Beyond that it's a judgement call, both on our part as posters and their part as moderators.

Saying it the way you seem to want them to - that this is a subjective order and watever they decide is what flies - would carry a pejorative connotation that they don't intend.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said!

[ QUOTE ]
Their intent is not to act as cruel, arbitrary dictators. They want guests in their house, and poorly treated guests leave.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, we don't want current guest's to engage in actions that cause other guests to leave.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you would rather current guest's take their "dirty laundry" with the Community team and air it on other forums? That is the part I do not understand, why not have a place here to do that. Keep it in line of course, but have that option. I wouldn't want it creeping across other gaming forums and turning off potential new customers.

You can't even give any sort of negative feedback on the surveys. It's an odd situation, since most companies would use negative feedback to find ways to improve themselves. Negative, but constructive, feedback does wonders for any company who cares at all about customer service.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is people don't "keep it in line". I've been watching the forums deteriorate at a rapid pace over the last 3+ years to where anyone who posts to a topic with an opposing view to the majority is quickly flamed, harassed, and belittled in a way I haven't seen since high school. It's really not an appropriate way for any adult to act, yet it has become the norm. I like a spirited debate, but that doesn't seem possible anymore as people very quickly move from discussion to personal attack and character assassination, and it's the reason I don't really post much anymore. I don't see the point if I'm just going to get verbally assaulted for having a differing opinion or chose to play devil's advocate.

I mean just look at the recent flood of posts regarding the change to Energy Transfer. It's literally impossible to sit down and read the entirety of these threads as the vast majority of the posts are little more than personal rants full of hyperbolic nonsense. And heaven help the poor souls that chimed in with "well I tested it myself and it's really not that bad..."

Those who have been here long enough should well remember CuppaJo, who though well-beloved also carried a very large, heavy ban stick, and wasn't afraid to use it. People knew exactly where the line was and that the line was going to be enforced. And the forums were a better place for it. But once the job title was elevated to Community Rep, and involved a lot more than policing the forums, things got way out of hand. So I'm glad to see we now again have dedicated moderators who will be strictly enforcing the rules. It really does make the forums a better place for everyone.

As for all the people complaining about how "vague" the rules seem, com'n, let's grow up a bit. Anyone over the age of 10 should know what's appropriate to say in public and what's not. And forums like this are very much public places. If you even have to question if something you've written is inappropriate, chances are IT IS and you shouldn't post it. Likewise, if it's something you wouldn't comfortably be able to say at the dinner table, at a holiday or party, in the middle of a supermarket, or would make your grandma pull you into the bathroom by the ear with a bar of soap in her hand, again, probably not a good idea to hit the "ok, submit" button.

And if by chance you happen to post something you honestly felt was ok but turns out not to be, you'll first be notified with a warning and an explanation. That should be enough for most people to get a pretty clear idea of where the line is. If not there will likely be a swinging ban stick in your future. While it may seem harsh to you, the rest of us will be better for it. If you can't play nicely in the sandbox, teacher isn't going to let you partake in recess...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And this was my point in regard to Vigilance. That it is not balanced across all Defenders -- some sets will benefit significantly from Vigilance (especially if they are trying to get the most out of it) and some sets, by their nature, will see very little benefit from Vigilance. ...Defiance 1.0 proved that basing an inherent buff on health is a bad idea. Well that's exactly what Vigilance does too. And there is no indication it's going to be revamped any time soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am in agreement with this viewpoint. Vigilance, as designed, does not benefit all defenders equally. Proactive sets like FF function in such a way that they negate Vigilance from activating.

With my FF character I have become accustomed to the fact that for all practical purposes I have a disfunctional inherent power. Teams I particpate on simply do not get damaged with the regularity that makes Vigilance anything more than another "snowball temp power." It looks good in concept but it doesn't hold up well when put to practical use.

- B.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's interesting, because at one point I respecced all my Defenders out of the Fitness pool thinking that it wasn't necessary due to Vigilance. Well that was a rude surprise. My Dark, Storm, and FFer had to have Fitness respecced back in because there simply was not enough of a buff from Vigilance to keep them from running out of endurance.

My Empath and Trick Arrow are the only two that I was able to keep out of the Fitness pool and have no problems with, even though they both run Assault and Tactics full-time while teaming. I definitely notice the benefit of Vigilance on my Empath as she sometimes runs low on endurance if the team isn't taking much damage and she's doing more blasting than healing. Not sure I see much of it on my Trick Arrow. I think TA is very endurance friendly to begin with, and there are no toggles whatsoever in the set. I do notice that while soloing I really can't run the Leadership toggles without running out of end (which is fine cause I really don't need them while soloing), so I'm probably getting at least enough out of Vigilance while teaming to cover the cost of those 2 toggles.

Y'know, maybe a better way to put it is "proactive mitigation" and "reactive mitigation". Because even when an FFer is playing reactively by using Force Bolt or Repulsion Bomb when things start to get a little hairy, they are both powers that mitigate damage proactively, meaning they frak up your foes so they can't attack.

Now a Dark or Kin in the same situation, playing reactively, has the option of using either a proactive mitigation power or a reactive mitigation power. They can choose to heal the team (reactive mitigation), debuff/mez the foes so they do less damage (proactive mitigation), or a little of both.

The use of the terms is in reference to the way the powers mitigate damage and is not meant to infer anything about how players use the powers.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Damage is fundamentally mitigated before it happens through methods designed to prevent it from being applied to a character, after it happens through HP regeneration, or during it's application through damage reduction.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I said previous, I don't agree or disagree with Philotic, but I think I see where he's coming from, and where you have a difference in terminology.

You are defining "proactive" as "before the attack". That is, all FF powers are proactive because they prevent the attack from hitting the ally the foe intends to hit. The attack is either deflected, or the foe is prevented from firing. Thus, the damage mitigation is "proactive", it occurs before the attack itself hits.

However, Philotic is not using the term in that fashion. In fact, it really isn't proper to use the term that strictly because we are talking about "proactive" in regards to Vigilance. Vigilance is a power that provides Endurance to the Defender AFTER HIS ALLIES HAVE TAKEN DAMAGE. Therefore one could define "proactive" as taking action not before an attack hits, but before the ally has taken damage. "Reactive" would be an action taken after the ally has taken damage.

In other words, you are entering a grey area here where your allies have already been hit, and you are now taking reactive action to prevent FURTHER damage. Your action is not proactive because you didn't take it prior to the start of combat, as you would in applying bubbles. Instead, you take action during combat, just as the reactive Defender would take action to recover the damage taken not after the combat is over, but while the combat is still going on.

[ QUOTE ]
Therefore FF is proactive. It can only prevent damage from happening. There is NO argument that can state FF removes damage after it takes place (which is the realm of a reactive defense set).

[/ QUOTE ]

In this I have to agree with you. FF can only prevent damage from happening, it cannot remove it. Unless you get Aid Other from the Medicine Pool, which in my opinion goes outside the concept of Force Field, your allies must rest in order to recover any damage they have taken.

To use the terminology above, a reactive set can take proactive action before the combat begins, take both reactive and proactive action during the combat to remove damage and prevent more, and take reactive action after the combat to remove the remainder of the damage. Force Field can only take proactive action before the fight, and proactive and reactive action during the fight. Once the fight's over, the FF cannot help any further.

Then again, Dark's post combat capabilities are limited as well, so that's not unique.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, now things are just getting too complicated. I never meant to cause such a conflagration of terms.

I used the words "proactive" and "reactive" in a very general sense. Proactive sets, in general, protect the team so they take less damage, either thru defense or resistance buffs, or foe debuffs. You are using your powers to protect the team from harm, meaning, BEFORE they take damage.

Reactive sets, in general, restore health and/or endurance and remove status effects AFTER the damage has been taken or the effects are applied. If no damage is taken, then there is nothing for such sets to do.

Now even within sets that are generally considered proactive or reactive there are powers that are of the other, and vice versa. For example, applying Clear Mind to a teammate before a battle with mez-heavy critters (such as Tsoo) would be a proactive use of the power. You are applying the protection to prevent status effects. If you were to wait until a teammate was already mezzed and then cast Clear Mind to break the mez effect, this would be a reactive use of the power -- you used the power after your teammate was already affected.

Here is a real world example.

Proactively taking care of your teeth means you diligently brush and floss, get regular cleanings and fluoride treatments, all in an effort to prevent damage and decay.

Reactively taking care of your teeth means you don't brush or floss much, and your only visits to the dentist are when you're in pain. The dentist then does his best to fix the cause of your pain, whether it be by putting in or replacing a filling, doing a root canal, extraction, etc. These are reactive efforts because the damage has already been done, and the dentist is doing whatever he can to fix it.

Now for most people taking care of their teeth is somewhere in the middle, a little bit of proaction and a little bit of reaction. So there is always a grey area.

But again, I use the terms in the most general of fashions. FF prevents the team from taking damage or being affected by most status effects. This is proactive damage mitigation -- you prevent damage from being taken. If you think about it nearly every tank, scrapper, brute, and stalker protection sets are all proactive in that they prevent the character from taking damage. The only reactive set is Regeneration. Regens can't prevent themselves from taking damage as they have no significant defense or resistances, they can only heal themselves after they have been hurt. Their powers are reactive -- they are used after damage is taken.

So in the most basic way I can say it:

Proactive = preventing the team from taking damage.
Reactive = restoring health after damage has been taken.

Most Defender sets have a little of each. FF and Trick Arrow are the only sets that are entirely proactive. Sonic is close, except for Clarity, which can be used both reactively (after a teammate has been mezzed) or proactively (applied before being mezzed to prevent it), and Storm, which has O2 Boost. Radiation, Kinetics, and Dark are mixed, each having a few proactive and reactive powers. Empathy is the most reactive set, but even so it still has a few proactive powers in it.

And the whole reason for this diatribe is Vigilance. It's designed to give you a greater endurance discount as the team's health drops. Now it's pretty easy to see that "proactive" sets, that is, sets that prevent the team from taking damage, are not going to get as much from Vigilance as sets that are "reactive", that is, do nothing to prevent damage from being taken, but instead heals the team after they've been hurt.

And this was my point in regard to Vigilance. That it is not balanced across all Defenders -- some sets will benefit significantly from Vigilance (especially if they are trying to get the most out of it) and some sets, by their nature, will see very little benefit from Vigilance. In many ways it rewards you for being a bad Defender. A Defender's job is to protect the team, whether it be proactivly or reactively. If you're a really good Defender chances are your team is going to stay healthy most of the time. If you're a bad Defender, then the team isn't going to stay so healthy, and you get rewarded for your incompetence by getting a huge endurance discount. Defiance 1.0 proved that basing an inherent buff on health is a bad idea. Well that's exactly what Vigilance does too. And there is no indication it's going to be revamped any time soon.

[ QUOTE ]
I never understood why people think vigilance is better on an Empathy defender. When things start to go south, an Empathy defender can use vigilance to remove vigilance or use their secondary to remove enemies, a FF defender is using vigilance to remove enemies with their primary and secondary so they don't get more vigilance. Hell, if someone on a team with my FF/Nrg takes damage, I am going to get use out of vigilance, because I sure as hell can't eliminate my vigilance bonus like an Emp might be tempted to. More Energy Torrent and Repulsion Bomb please.

Edit: What Philotic said.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but in practice it doesn't really work that way. If the team is taking damage even an Empath can only do so much healing at one time. You have one moderate single target heal, one extreme single target heal (that sucks 25% of your HPs away and leaves you unhealable), and a low yield PbAoE heal.

Now if it's only the tank that's taking significant damage, then yeah, you probably won't get much from Vigilance. But that's usually not the case. Usually the whole team is taking some amount of damage at the same time. You might toss out you PbAoE which just keeps them going, and use your single target heals on the mates that are in the worst shape. It's not like you can fire off your PbAoE heal and restore everyone to full health instantly. And as soon as they're healed, guess what? They start taking damage again. Lather, rinse, repeat.

A good FFer doesn't see that much variation in their teammate's health as they should have anywhere from 35-45% defense. What little damage the team does take usually just heals away on it's own due to regeneration or other available healing powers.

At least this has been my experience. And both my Empath and FFer are in their 30s, so it's not like I haven't played them enough to know how they function on teams.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fixing that one inherent so that the buff can be had while soloing and is not dependent upon the team's health (which favors reactive sets like Empathy, but absolutely kills proactive sets like FF) would go a long way to making Defenders much more pleasant to play at all levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

ARRRRGH!


I want to pluck out my own eyeballs everytime I hear that Force Fields is a "proactive" set. We have THREE powers that are proactive, and the rest can be used EITHER proactively OR reactively. I wrote a long diatribe a year or so ago about Vigilance and Force Fields, but I can't remember it. I'll give you a quick summation of what it said though:

all those "situational" powers that FF has? Yeah, when your team has almost no health... you can use ALL of them. Why? Because you'll have the endurance to have Force Bubble, Repulsion Field, Dispersion Bubble on all at the time time while you're running all over and whacking things with Force Bolt, Repulsion Bomb and Detention Field.

You can save a team from a team wipe like that, THANKS to Vigilance. If it didn't exist, you couldn't do all that at once because you'd be out of blue in a moment.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the simple truth is that while your teammates are fully bubbled they are going to take little to no damage. If the team also has a healer who likes to spam their AoE heal on auto, what little damage they are going to take is quickly erased. The only time you're realistically going to get any benefit from Vigilance is when Deflection and Insulation Shields drop, which basically gives you enough of a buff so you don't run out of end as you throw out 14 bubbles in rapid succession and keep your toggles up.

The FFers job (as is the Sonic's) is to prevent the team from taking damage. That's why it's called a proactive set. The Empath's job is to restore HPs after damage is taken. And that's why it's called a reactive set. And it's why my Empath has no need for Stamina, while my FFer withers away without it, even on a full team. If I'm doing my job and keeping everyone bubbled they simply do not take enough damage for me to see any major benefit from Vigilance.

Now this is not to say that FF can't be reactive if you've taken those powers. But by and large the main core of the set are the two shields and Dispersion Bubble, all of which are proactive. If your team is facing a total wipe while fully bubbled then something is very wrong -- you're either in way over your heads or you're on a sucky team.

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder what Castle thinks of FF as it stands?

It certainly is an odd duck in a defender's hands -- the set seems to have been made to go hand in hand with the assumption that distance is damage mitigation*, but CoH has evolved into, especially on teams, an AoE zerg-fest that doesn't jive with 50' repel powers.

I mean ... the set works well most of the time. And you can do some interesting things with set bonuses (up to and including milking more def than my freakin' EA brute can). But it's missing some, you know, 'zazz. Damage mitigation is easy to come by in CoH, and defender FF isn't that great a performer on teams that already have good mitigation -- the set is too focused on mitigation, and isn't even the best at mitigation in all situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

My guess is that Castle sees nothing in his datamining statistics to indicate the set underperforms compared to other Defender primaries, Controller & Mastermind secondaries. 'Zazz unfortunately has nothing to do with it. I think he's well aware the set is rather dull and has many powers that are by and large highly situational and often times detrimental to teams. But the powers that work well work so well (as you said, the ability to hit the defense cap is nothing to sneeze at) there is no pressing need to start revamping the underperforming powers. The change to Repulsion Bomb was a nice gift -- but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for more changes.

In many ways the Sonic Resonance set is very similar to Force Fields, but at least that set manages to squeeze in at least a little 'zazz.

Seriously tho, Defenders as a whole have not been given any major love in a VERY long time. I have no idea if they're even on Castle's "I'll get to it eventually" list. Personally I think a revamp to Vigilance is way overdue. Fixing that one inherent so that the buff can be had while soloing and is not dependent upon the team's health (which favors reactive sets like Empathy, but absolutely kills proactive sets like FF) would go a long way to making Defenders much more pleasant to play at all levels.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
* Change to a timed toggle power so that it can be turned off at will but is forced off if left on too long.
That would be an improvement.

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe this has been stated many times as being impossible with the game mechanics:

Toggle Powers work by pulsing their effect for short durations on their target. If the effect is to make the target unaffected by powers from another source then the toggle will not effect the target on the next tick allowing the effect to wear off. Leaving us with an enemy that due to Server Latency could affect others but would be Practically Immune to return fire.

However, if paired with this change:

[ QUOTE ]
Make into a "reverse Personal Force Field". The enemy has high Defense and Damage Resistance but can't attack.

[/ QUOTE ]
It would be a possible and highly usable effect

[/ QUOTE ]

It can be done if you design it as a pet effect. You flag the pet as being able to attack that which is un-attackable (ala Hamidon) so it can continuously apply the status effects. Once the toggle is turned off, the pet goes bye bye and the effects wear off.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
* Change it into a pet that follows you and has it's own PBAoE Repel ability.
Eek! I bet it's gonna be suicidal. I vote no.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was one of my very outside the box suggestions. Honestly it would be no more suicidal than a Gravity Troller with Singularity. The only difference is that the FF pet doesn't attack. Having a Grav Troller with a Sing I can personally attest as to how useful the repel affect on the Sing is. Boss bearing down on you? Hide behind the Sing and watch it go flying. That's pretty much the idea I was going for, essentially a non-attacking Singularity.

[/ QUOTE ]

For this, I had a mental image. I keep seeing my teammates' "fairy" pets chasing enemies. So if it did repel, it would repel the enemy. Chase the enemy, repel it again. Rinse, repeat. How many nearby groups would be aggroed by that?

On the other hand, Singularity behaves quite nicely. I don't know if the AI is different or specific for it, but I don't remember seeing Singularity chasing much, if at all. Now the "fairy" pet is just scary, and I had that in mind while looking at this suggestion. :P

I'd vote yes, if the pet behaves.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since it doesn't attack there is no reason it should chase anything except you. I'm about 2 month away from having a vet pet, so I really can't compare, but I think the reason Sings and other Troller pets work so well is because they never get too close to you when they follow. They always stop about 8-10 feet behind you. The trade off is that it's sometimes hard to get them to take the alpha attack because they're too far away to attack, and by the time you move close enough to get them close enough YOU'VE got the aggro, not them.

And I don't know about your Defenders, Trollers, and MMs, but I try to keep mine of melee whenever possible. So it's not like I'd ever have to worry about running into mobs and scattering them. I mean it's no different than the way Repulsion Field and Repel is now. If you use them you certainly don't go running into big mobs cause you know it's just gonna piss them off. It would be no different as a pet. The advantage to the pet is that the KB can be somewhat directional instead of omnidirectional. Stand in front of the pet and anything that comes from behind gets KBd. Stand behind the pet and anything that comes from the front gets KBd, etc. It gives you some control over what gets KBd and what doesn't. And hell, if for some reason you want to engage in melee with some critter heading towards you, you can cause the pet is 8-10 feet behind you and outside of melee range. This is something you absolutely can't do with RF or Repel. If it's on, anything that gets close to you get's KBd, with zero control over it.

[ QUOTE ]

General Requests
* Add a Defense DeBuff somewhere.
I don't see where it could be added.

[/ QUOTE ]

As one of any number of debuffs that should be placed into Force Bubble. IMO, when foes are inside Force Bubble they should be hit with the kitchen sink of debuffs. There are plenty of powers in the game that apply multiple debuffs to foes. Force Bubble should be one of them. I went into this in some length at one point, but the beauty of this is that it would only affect foes that are strong enough to resist the repel. Foes stuck at the edge of the bubble perhaps just get a -tohit and/or -damage. But those inside the bubble get the multiple debuff effects such as -tohit, -dam, -defense, and slow, with perhaps even a debuff to recovery and/or endurance. Basically the idea is that it takes a tremendous amount of energy to withstand being inside the bubble, so it's going to severe adverse effects upon your fitness and ability to attack and do damage.

[ QUOTE ]
* Allow the field to be "suppressed", allowing the bubbler to fire through it with either a loss of defense or with a severe defense and/or resistance penalty.
This is a good suggestion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a good suggestion, but I think in terms of actual gameplay it won't really work so well. How often does a Defender just use one or two attacks? And then you'll have to sit there for 10 seconds or so, completely vulnerable to attack, while you wait for the suppression to wear off. If you make the suppressed defense/resistance high enough to be useful then the power becomes too powerful. If you suppress the defense/resistance to a very low level or zero then there is no point, you might as well just turn it off to attack and turn it back on when you're done.

[ QUOTE ]
Deflection and Insulation Shields:
* Switch the Defense percentages between Dispersion Bubble and Insulation and Deflection Shields.
What would be the reason for this? In the end, wouldn't the percentages be the same? I'd not like to see that changed, because I want my castable shields to be more stronger than Dispersion Bubble, as they are currently.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, because if you switched them then the caster gets more defense, while there would indeed be no change to allies as long as they stayed inside Dispersion Bubble.

[ QUOTE ]
Dispersion Bubble:
* Replace the sleep weakness with an immobilize weakness.
I think the devs have decided that the main weakness of Force Fields is sleep and psi. Since both are related, I see it makes sense. Because you can say sleep relates 100% to mental powers, but you can't say the same for holds, disorients or immobilizes. A solid shield cannot block a mental power, and that's probably working as designed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that's debatable. PFF gives you psionic protection, and it's no more or less solid than any other power. Personally I don't think it should have any holes in its protection. If you can protect yourself from a mental hold, why not a mental sleep? The reason for the lack of sleep protection has never really been explained. But it carries over into Sonics as well. They have the same lack of sleep protection in their big bubble.

[ QUOTE ]
* Add some defense debuff resistance.
It would be interesting, but I think that debuff resistance only relates to self-powers that grant defense. Super Reflexes, for example. Even so, a minor def debuff resistance would be something.

[/ QUOTE ]

My understanding is that at some point all melee defense powers (Super Reflexes, Ninjitsu, Ice Aura, Stone Armor, Energy Aura, and perhaps Invulnerability) will get defense debuffs added to their defense powers. I don't know if Castle plans on doing the same for FF or pool powers that grant defense. It might wind up being a Tank/Scrapper/Brute/Stalker ability.

Honestly I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen for FF.

[ QUOTE ]
Force Bolt:
* Add a low percentage chance to disorient, or a minor disorient.
Would make some sense, but if it does, all attacks that are blunt and do knockback would deserve the same treatment, so I don't think it's likely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, most smashing attacks usually do have some kind of disorient and/or knockback in them. Think of Mace, Super Strength, Stone Melee, Energy Melee, etc. Not all KB powers have a disorient, but it's not uncommon for both to be in the same power.

[ QUOTE ]
* Change it into a pet that follows you and has it's own PBAoE Repel ability.
Eek! I bet it's gonna be suicidal. I vote no.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was one of my very outside the box suggestions. Honestly it would be no more suicidal than a Gravity Troller with Singularity. The only difference is that the FF pet doesn't attack. Having a Grav Troller with a Sing I can personally attest as to how useful the repel affect on the Sing is. Boss bearing down on you? Hide behind the Sing and watch it go flying. That's pretty much the idea I was going for, essentially a non-attacking Singularity.

[ QUOTE ]
Repulsion Bomb:
* Decrease the animation and/or ca st time SUBSTANTIALLY.
Don't touch the animation. I love it. One of the best in the game. My opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't checked this, someday I'll get around to it. Repulsion Bomb shares the same animation as Neutron Bomb, but I believe NB's animation runs significantly faster. If so, the same treatment should be applied to Repulsion Bomb.

[ QUOTE ]
* Make it the same radius as Dispersion, or switch the radii of the two powers.
I think that, due to lag reasons, that would become a problem. Enemies would be able to get into melee range if the server response isn't fast enough to understand the enemy is being repelled. I already saw that happening with the current version of the power.

[/ QUOTE ]

The size of Force Bubble presents two distinct problems. First, it forces all melee toons to fight at the edge of FB, which puts them outside of Dispersion Bubble and dangerously close to being outside the range of Leadership powers. Second, it has a nasty tendency to generate unwanted aggro from nearby spawns. It also places critters beyond the range of many of a Defender's blast attacks.

If there is indeed an issue with server lag and application of the repel effect, perhaps adding a slow would help here. Not sure why repel would be subject to this problem while the KB effects of Repulsion Field and Repel are not. If it's a matter of pulse times, then you simply have to increase them when you make the field radius smaller to ensure the repel effect gets applied faster.

[ QUOTE ]
* Reduce the endurance cost or the recharge.
The endurance cost is not a problem, currently, I don't think. For Controller, that would be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, if Castle were to throw in a bunch of status effects (and he *should*) it will most likely result in a hefty increase in the power's end cost, or some kind of limitation as to how often it can be used (such as turning it into a click power or limited toggle). I'm thinking something along the lines of the cost of Enervating Field and Radiation Infection combined. That should cover having at least as many debuffs in those two powers and keep the end cost in line for such a toggle.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Force Bolt:<ul type="square">[*]Add KnockUP Mag as well.[/list]
[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't possible. Knockback and knockup are the same function with the modifier that knockup is simply very low mag knockback (under 1.0 mag) because the mag determines the distance of the flight. The devs would have to create an entirely new effect that is different than knockback, making it so that knockup simply has different mag and "duration" (how long you are being knocked about) than a similar knockback power, or separate the mag and "duration" of knockback, so that the 2 effects are only a difference of "duration."

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe this is true. Knockdown is knockback of MAG of 0.75 or less. Knockup is a completely separate effect, and powers have KU MAGS that range from ~2-9 or so, where the MAG level determines how high the target travels upwards.

There are many critters in the game that are resistant against knockback and knockdown, but not knockup. I asked Castle if he'd be willing to change the knockdown in Repulsion Bomb to knockup, and he said no. As for Force Bolt, why would you want to add a KU component? I'm not sure it really fits the power. And it would look really odd against foes that have KB/D resistance and not KU, as you'd fire off this ball of force and the target would go straight up into the air. It would look very weird.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would love to see - COMPRESSION FIELD

Basically the opposite of Force Bubble.
A target AoE force field that compresses down and pulls in all foes in nice and close together.
Kinda like a AoE immob except the foes can move, they just cant move out of the area. (maybe an acc check to keep them in the field)
It would be nice if it had a minor DoT (due to the increased pressure)

[/ QUOTE ]
I was actually going to suggest this to Philly in PMs but I don't think it's doable with the current code.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not only a cool idea, but its quite doable in code.

I pulled off a similar trick in Freedom Force to create a "Personal Gravity Well" effect. If I could do that using just a Python Script interface, Im pretty sure Cryptic, with their full access to the source code of this game, could make it happen here.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's probably do-able. Sorta like a reverse Bonfire -- instead of KBing them back you KB them in. The only real trick is if you want the field to shrink over time. That's not something available on any power in the game, so it's questionable if a power can be coded as such.

But the discussion is kinda moot as we've already been told a number of times that it's extremely unlikely that a power's core function will ever change.

Better to think of ways of improving the powers the way they are now instead of coming up with completely different ones.

[ QUOTE ]
I bought a new computer today because my old one died. I now have vista 32 and have installed latest video drivers. But says my video drivers need updated. How do I fix this????

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but my crystal ball only works if you're in the same room with me. How bout you let us know what you bought, what kind of video card you have, and which drivers you're using? Oh, and how does the game play, despite being told you need to update your drivers?

Now there used to be an issue with the game telling you your drivers were old because it was improperly reading the driver version strings from the OS. But I'm pretty sure this problem was fixed awhile ago. So who/where are you getting the old drivers message?

And btw, you should move this post to the technical issues and bugs forum as a separate topic. This thread is not really a tech support thread, it's supposed to be more of a general Vista-related issues/fixes/troubleshooting thread.

I dunno, call me silly, and definitely a novice base builder, but for me it's like ripping teeth out whenever I need to make changes to the base. The whole system is kudgy and often very counter-intuitive. I dunno if it's something that can be fixed or needs to be totally rewritten from scratch.

A few things I've noticed that irritate me to no end:

1.) Why must rooms be separated by an entire row(s) of wasted space? If you're on a small plot it's absolutely skull crushing trying to place all the rooms you need due to so much wasted space. A doorway should be just that -- a hole in a shared wall between two rooms. Right now it's more like a foyer between rooms. I don't understand why a room cannot be placed flush against another room.

2.) The preset room sizes do not match the layout of the plots due to #1, again, leaving so much wasted space and utter frustration trying to manipulate the placement of rooms. And some rooms are too small (workshops) and others too large (medical bays), considering the number of items each is designed to hold. Why can't I decide the size and shape of the room to fit my needs, where the cost of the room is dictated solely by its features (how many items of varying types it can hold), not by its size and shape. A system like this also allows you to dynamically expand or shrink a room as necessary, instead of trying to stuff everything into a tiny workshop or have a huge medical bay with nothing but a single med tube in it.

3.) Some kind of user style preset option is desperately needed. Go on, lay down multiple rooms of the same type (such as teleport bays) and try to exactly match the style and color of each room. I dare you.

4.) Why are teleporters limited to 2 beacons??? Which then leads to, why must I have 1/2 of my plot eaten up by multiple teleport rooms and teleporters cause each room only holds 2 teleporters, each which only accepts 2 beacons? And there has got to be a better way to attach beacons to teleporters other than the "keep moving it around till the teleporter you want to attach to lights up" method we now must use.

5.) Why are the costs of control items not scaled properly? Why would I ever pay more for a item that generates less control than a cheaper one that offers more? This makes no sense. Cheaper items = less functionality; more expensive = more functionality. Truly baffling.

6.) Signs. For God's sake and the love of all that's holy, we need signs. Or placeable icons on the base map. Something to tell you where things are. I am sick to death of entering a large base and running around in circles for 10 minutes trying to find the teleporters or enhancement bins. These things should either automatically appear on the map, or we should be able to edit the base map so we can indicate where things are. Even just having the map indicate which room(s) are workshops, which are teleporters, etc., would go a long way. And have you ever entered a large base's huge teleport room, with absolutely no clue which teleporter goes where? Why can't I just click on each teleporter from a distance and have it show me where it goes? No, I have to run into each and every one trying to find the one that goes where I want to go. Frustration at it's finest.

Well that's all I can think of off the top of my head.

Wait... where are the pin-ups to go with the calendars? Ms. Liberty, Swan, Sister Psyche, War Witch... all in naughty poses.

And hell, you can make one for the girls too... Posi (helmet ON please), Statesman (lets see how big that cape really is), Synapse, Manticore... where are their naughty calendar pinups???

I wonder if there are any plans to proliferate the APPs over to the Villain side and create equivalent PPPs on the Hero side?

Well I can dream, can't I?

[ QUOTE ]
I'll tell you what I learned last night - the first heroside mission is much easier, and faster than the first villainside mission. I solo'd both and I completed the Council caves mission with three characters in just over the amount of time it took me to do the CoT cave once. That could be because my heroes are better suited to soloing (my fire/mind dominator died twice), but it definitely seemed like there were a lot more mobs on the villain mission.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know if you noticed, but the Council missions are defeat all, while the CoT mission is not -- you just need to defeat the end boss.

And neither of the second missions are defeat all's either. You only need to defeat the spawn that gives out the key, and then obviously finish off the hero or villain-specific object at the end.

[ QUOTE ]
BaB is Isaac?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, Sexy Jay is Isaac. BAB is the doctor.

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, then which one of us is Charo?

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be Castle. I think he's the only one with the hair for it.

Though I'm not exactly sure I'd want to see him in something floor length and strapless &lt;shudders&gt;

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually the best analogy I have thought of is that Lighthouse is "Julie the Cruise Director," and I'm Gopher!

[/ QUOTE ]

You do know that now people are going to start referring to Lighthouse as "Julie, the Cruise Director" now, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

You DO realize that perhaps only 10% of forumites are old enough to get this reference, right?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
JAY IS LAZY!

So I go off to the little gurls room, and when I returned back to my office someone had hijacked my chair.

I know I'm not crazy, or at least not entirely so, but this was really weird.

I go into the break room/game room, and there is Jay playing a video game, SITTING ON MY CHAIR!

"Oh" he says, "I thought you went home."

So what if I did?

JAY IS LAZY! SEXY but lazy.

Ex

(sitting on Lighthouse's chair, posting from headquarters.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly...
...I love our devs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Technically, Ex Libris is not a Dev, but is instead a Community Co-ordinator.

Which means she is essentially the corporate version of a Kindergarden teacher.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh I know, I'm just too lazy to clarify, and use the blanket term "dev" for everyone at NCNC now ;P

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually the best analogy I have thought of is that Lighthouse is "Julie the Cruise Director," and I'm Gopher!

[/ QUOTE ]

So does that make Sexy Jay Isaac the Bartender?!?!?!

I guess I only have 2 suggestions for future "limited entry" events.

1.) Place the contact (in this case, the Usher) in a location where people are forced to line up, with the appropriate no powers, no jumping fields and a GM bouncer to kick people who try to cut the line. When Lighthouse and Ex Libris were in Pocket D trying to give out titles they were completely swarmed by people, and despite asking numerous times for those who got their titles to kindly move away so others could get theirs, no one budged.

I then sent a tell to both Lighthouse and Ex, reminding them of the last time someone gave out titles they did it at the top of one of the ramps in Pocket D, which forced people to line up and made it very difficult to cut the line. Lighthouse then hopped up to the top of the ramp, and it was smooth sailing from there (score 1 for the Poobah!)

This technique should be used in the future for any other kind of "ushers". No matter how politely you ask people to stand in line, Force Bubble them, and use Power Word: Death on them, they're not gonna do it unless there is a well-marked, pre-defined line area with no way of cutting, whether it be a ramp, or a velvet-roped corridor (with invisible walls that won't let you jump the rope).

2.) If you're gonna have an all-out PvP brawl, try to make sure it's in a zone with a hospital unit!!! And if that can't be done, maybe you can create some kind of auto-rez ability (you die, and are automatically hospital-style rezzed in a few seconds). The battle portion was fairly short, and if you got knocked out early it was pretty much over for you (Statesman one-shotted my Brute at the very beginning of the fight, right after I got my toggles up -- I guess he was peeved when I mentioned "hm, I always figured he'd be taller..." Using an awaken just meant you were gonna die again before the stun wore off, and clicking hospital took you out of the zone with no way to get back.

Otherwise I had a blast. It was quite fun. I would have liked to have seen more stuff going on in Pocket D (like maybe a giant "monitor" screen simulcasting the wedding!!!), but in any case it was a nice 1-day event.

Now as to the Valentine's Day event as a whole, I gotta agree with others on a big giant "meh". I understand the need to provide the same event as in previous years, especially where badges are concerned, and I don't have a problem with that. But it would be nice to add something substantive on top of that for those old geezers who already did last year's event and have no desire to do it again for rewards I already have. One single warehouse mission with no badge, no temp powers, or other special reward (like a nice cut scene with Manticore and Sister Psyche thanking you for retrieving their gifts, or something equally appropriate on the villain side) was a big let down.

Hell, it could have been as easy as reviving the candy cane idea, but this time make it hearts that you can collect and turn in to some Cupid-like cherub in Pocket D for similar rewards. Something for cryin' out loud!!