Cavatina

Originally Posted by Smurphy

Same question as the last two times we've had these threads: You guys talkin' revenue or profit?

Originally Posted by Slax_

I just kept flipping, more turns that ussual. Hoping for truly stupid profits this week.

Originally Posted by Abigail_Frost

Signed up. I'll bring cheesecake to the next meeting.

Originally Posted by Nethergoat

They should- everyone will be flush with cash and have lots and lots of slots to fill.

Originally Posted by prvtslacker

Dang I would have bought and DL'ed it if I would have known. I guess I need to load steam more often.

Originally Posted by Kitteh

No tally yet, but the profitable-fun has only just begun!

Over the next several days, folks will be busy building out their brand new 50s and I'm wholly committed to give them what they need.

Originally Posted by Clave_Dark_5

Then how come I keep running into players who don't know how to slot or what a decent build should look like?

Originally Posted by DSorrow

So PvP IOs drop in PvP zones but no more in the arena?

Originally Posted by Biospark

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The question is NOT whether they should solo like gods, but whether they should solo BETTER than they currently can ?

My answer is absolutely YES.
If your answer is the opposite then you and will just have to disagree. No hard feelings for me.

But dont think I am gonna post my ideas AGAIN just to be made fun of and called a newb.

[/ QUOTE ]

The real question that most people that disagree with changes as a whole to the AT/game structure ask in response (and are never actually addressed simply because the question renders your point largely moot) is whether the changes that would make some of the defender primaries (strangely enough, those that excel at teaming) more effective at soloing would imbalance everything else within the complex workings of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand your point Umbral regarding whether a change could unbalance a powerset. This is a real concern. One that I am sure game Developers consider at great length before they make changes.

I am not sure why you think it makes my point moot though.
Unless you are assuming (Like many objectors DO) that ANY change WOULD make the set overpowered.
That notion to me is fatalistic at best. I personally am confident in both the DEVS abilities and my own judgement that it is not only possible, but would not unbalance anything.

As an example: If it were unbalanced for say, a FF defender to be able to buff himself for solo play with Deflection, Insulation AND Dispersion. WHY then is it somehow balanced that he can do JUST THAT to 7 other people in a team.
You might say, well he could then also add pools to make this somehow CRAZY unfair. But what about that INV tank that just got these buffs ON TOP of his AT defenses AND perhaps Pools that he took.

Its very hard to convince me that 7 other people can enjoy HUGE rewards that I provide, but cannot also provide to myself. And Further that changing that will somehow totally unbalance the set.

Originally Posted by Turbo_Ski

You're purposely making playing a melee AT not fun anymore by simply using force bubble and you're being a jerk when asked to stop using it. Yes I would have kicked you immediately for such an attitude.

Originally Posted by bricktop

Crushing Impact: Acc/Dam recipes selling for 8-10 million as the buy it now price. 0 recipes available 300+ bidding for them.

Crushing Impact: Acc/Dam enhancments selling for 5 million as the buy it now price. 69 available.

Who's evil plan was that?

Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight

It takes alot of reason and logic to slay a thread that starts out with a juggernaut's worth of misconceptions. I doubt we've overcome the bag of hit points that it has, but we maybe slowly over coming its regen rate.

Originally Posted by VictoriaHunt_EU

I agree with OP mostly. I have played now while for AE missions with my level 50 character.

Why?

Even with 20 boss enemy groups, it isn't much a challenge for good lvl 50 team. So, it's only way to find even some challenge. I do agree that it's booring because most the time it's just same mission over and over. How ever, I think reasons for that is more exp and reward related. I'm building my own personal single player base and I get nice amount of prestige by been in those farm teams. I only do AE missions with my level 50's, because it doesn't matter what missions my lvl 50 does, it's all about challenge and rewards.

So, what wrong?

MA's are destroying this game really fast because:

MA allows extreme fast leveling. People are powerleveling characters to 50 in few hours, so powerlevelers can do even multible 50's in same day. This lowers value of having lvl 50 character for everyone. Because it use to be mark that someone actually knows how to play they character. Today, with this fast powerleveling, we have lvl 50 characters who doesn't even know how to play they characters. Also it spoils the new players, if they think AE missions is the way to play this game.

I looked player base in union server (CoH side). This was result.

Amount of players:
Level _ Workday _ Weekend
01-10 __ 16% ____ 13%
11-20 ___ 9% ____ 9%
21-30 __ 10% ____ 16%
31-40 __ 13% ____ 19%
41-50 __ 52% ____ 43%

Usually there is less high level players in mmorpgs than lower ones, but not in this game. Because with AE missions, no-one stays lower level long.

If the developers even care little bit about CoH they could solve most the problem easy.

1. Try to remove exploit possibilities (Like ability do mission without risks)
2. Remove the auto SK feature by droping the MA system from Task force to normal missions.
3. Allow normal mission (not MA ones) have bigger spawns for challenge.

Example level 50 scrapper doing solo missions with spawn 2-5 enemies is insult.

Originally Posted by JDouble_NA

Originally Posted by biff10426

I've already stated my proposed "formula" for purples: you do it like the defense mechanic streakbreaker. The longer you go without successfully rolling a purple, the higher the chance that you will roll one becomes. Based on kills, of course. I don't see the problem with this, at the very least they could then maybe call their game "casual"

Originally Posted by The_Alt_oholic

Uh, farming in the AE is an exploit per the DEVs.

Originally Posted by ChaosExMachina

Just to be contrary:

Marketeers DO raise prices.

What? Didn't people who know what they are talking about, including Smurphy, make a very good case that they do not, and back it up well?

Yes, it's true that marketeers do not, overall, raise the equilibrium price. They may even make it more reasonable by reducing inflation through market fees.

However, marketeers make drops in prices less extreme by buying low priced supply. A patient buyer has to compete with marketeers for chances to take advantage.

Originally Posted by Laevateinn

Isn't it ironic that a change presumably intended to hurt farming has ended up benefitting farmers?

Originally Posted by MunkiLord

Thanks, and yes I did manipulate teh markets. I'm out to get your warshade