CodeGuy

If the accuracy bonus was as much as an SO, then it would be useful. However, since it is not enough to hit the accuracy cap of 95%, then people will still slot 1 acc and 5 damage. That means that against even level foes, archers have the same accuracy as everyone else, 95%.

A LOT of people play against even level foes. Foes with accuracy debuffs are around, but not a whole lot. So for a lot of archers, they have the same accuracy as every one else, but no secondary effect.

Besides, anyone can take a yellow inspiration against a higher level enemy. They drop all the time. An Archer can't take a debuffing attack inspiration or a knockback inspiration.

Sorry Geko, but the math is against you on this one. If you raise the accuracy bonus to enough to hit the 95% cap, then it'll be worth it because we'll be able to slot 6 damage. However, then damage inspirations and deffender buffs won't be as useful because we'll be hitting the damage cap easier. They won't be useless, but they will be less useful.

He said they would do that when they could. He never said that's all they would do.

Or Star Wars: Galaxies.

So far I haven't been able to tell the difference. My 30s defender was having fun on Rugged before I5, he's having fun on Rugged now. My Regen Scrapper (also 30s) still feels fun. Maybe the powersets I play or the slotting I chose made the difficulty increase not affect me.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'm suprised no one has brought up the "there should be one melee class" idea again.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a dumb idea anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's really not. Having a Tanker class to begin with was a bad idea. A whole section of heroes that can be beaten quickly, but they can't defeat enemies quickly either? That's guaranteed to be disappointing, and that's the way it has worked out. Over and over we've had people say they made a Tank because of the powersets, and then got upset because it wasn't fun. Even Statesman has said he regrets forming the archetyes so heavily around the classic MMO classes. The result was that they have had to raise the damage that Tanks do, but to offset that they've had to lower the ability to take damage. The whole thing isn't working out.

Before the devs lowered the defense caps on Scrappers, Scrappers were able to *make* tanks using power pools. They were actually better than tanks because they could tank *and* defeat enemies in a reasonable amount of time. If the game had shipped without a Tanker At, everyone who really loves the tanker playerstyle could have done that and been better of.

I think that getting rid of Tanks now would be much harder than if they'd just shipped that way originally, but it's still worth considering. Change all Tanks to scrappers. Open up all the powersets to both sides, so an Axe/Regen character would become possible. Raise the Scrapper defense caps so that the former tankers could still tank if the wanted to sacrifice a few more powers to tanking.

It'd be painful, but it would be worth considering. It' probably too late in the game to do it, but it's worth discussing at least.

As far as pricing goes, I actually need more details to make a decision on how reasonable it is.

Extreme Possibility #1: The game costs $50, and there's an extra $5 a month if you play both. Thus, buying and playing it for a month costs $55.

Extreme Possibility #2: The game costs $50, BUT that includes a free month, and there's no extra charge for playing both games. In that case, the expansion will actually cost me $35.

It could be somewhere inbetween these two extremes. I don't know, but if Extreme Possibity #2 comes true, then CoV won't actually cost me much more than a regular expansion pack.

[ QUOTE ]
Because it seemed that he meant "someday we'd like to do bases for CoH." Which would be silly because they obviously *can* do bases. It's apparent that what he actually meant was "we'd like to do bases for extra profit."

There's obviously nothing wrong with that, but still disappointing to me (I've been playing CoV beta and from what I've experienced, it's not worth $49.99 to those who've already spent over a year playing this game.)

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is, you're not dissappointed with something they said, you're dissappointed with something you were hoping for. Statesman said 10 months ago that bases are a CoV feature.

If you were hoping that we could get them without CoV, that's fine. I was hoping that too. It just doesn't make sense to complain about something that we were *hoping* they would do.

I *can* give my television to the people who live next door. If I tell them I've got an extra TV, they may even be hoping that I do. That doesn't mean it's OK for them to knock on my door and say, "Where's that TV you promised us."

[ QUOTE ]
Im not going to buy it. You go ahead. I will stay $50 richer, plus whatever per month fee they charge ya.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, see, THIS is a reasonable statement. They're not trying to rip you off, they're not lying to you about which product has what. They're offering a product and you're deciding not to buy it.

TOTALLY reasonable. If everone looked at it as "Do I really think that bases are worth what they're charging?" then there would be no problem.

I think you missed the point. $5 a month for one feature would become *more* than $50 for the entire game in less time than CoH has already been out.

[ QUOTE ]
but charge only $5/month extra for CoH users to have bases without CoV

[/ QUOTE ]

And 11 months later, people start getting upset because they realise they got ripped off.

On the issue of CoV costing a full $50.

Personally, I'm not so sure that this is a good idea either. They're trying something new. They're making a sequel that can connect to the original game. Nobody complained about Everquest 2 being $50, but that's because it clearly wasn't an expansion.

This isn't the route I would have taken, but they're trying something new. In a few months time, we'll see how it works out. Maybe it'll hurt them, getting few sales. Maybe it'll help them, and tons of people who never played CoH will buy CoV and play it standalone. We'll see.

Like I say, I'm not sure I like the idea of CoV costing $50. However, it does make sense that if we have to pay that much, that we get something that isn't being given away freely to people who didn't pay.

[ QUOTE ]
Statesman, I for one never expected bases to be available to non-CoV people. However, this is yet another example of your commitment to murkiness biting you in the rear.

Full disclose, early and often. Facts are your friends.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, no. Direct quote from Statesman:

Bases are CoV.

There was no murkiness on Statesman's part, only wishful thinking on our part.

No, it's a perfectly good example. Both Ford and Cryptic made a product and are asking you for money. If you don't pay the money, you don't get the product.

This is completely reasonable.

[ QUOTE ]
So many peole are expecting a game that's totally different b/c they're being told its a different game. Its actualy the same game with all new content and AT. While techincally it maybe a different game.. its really just CoH rewrapped with some new features.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true of almost every sequel ever made. Tony Hawk 2? They added a new trick, made some new levels and objectives, then charged full pirce for it even though it is essentially the same game. Half-Life 2: same thing. Grand Turisimo 2, Tekken 2, Jak and Daxter 2, Doom 2, Warcraft 2: SAME THING.

Of course it uses the same core system as CoH, it wouldn't be a sequel if it didn't. That doesn't mean it isn't a new game.

Statesman has never said that we'll get bases without CoV. Never.

On 11/09/04 (click here) he said they were part of CoV.

When people say they remember the devs saying we'd have them in CoH, that's just wishful thinking. I just did a search for and comments Statesman has made in the last 3 years on bases, and he's never said that.

Billiken, are you on drugs? Having unique features makes CoV *more* of a seperate game, not less. If it was nothing but new zones and nothing we hadn't seen before, *then* it would be a glorified Issue. Saying that CoV has gameplay that CoH doesn't have makes it just another issue, that doesn't make any sense.

[ QUOTE ]
Uh, you obviously *CAN* do bases as they're going to be in CoV. But if I'm reading this thread right, you just aren't WILLING to do bases without the purchase of CoV.

What a peculiarly SOE approach.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not just SOE. Ford does the same thing. They *CAN* put almost every bonus feature into every car they make, but they're only *WILLING* to do it in the cars for which people pay for the bonus packages.

Airlines *CAN* give First Class service to every passenger, but they're only *WILLING* to give it to the the people who pay for it.

CoH has spoiled us a little by giving us so many free updates. However, it is still reasonable for them to make something and put it up for sale.

Yeah, you certainly didn't have to play for an entire in the hope of getting a base. You could have played for a month, cancelled, and then waited for bases.

So basically, the last year of play is a seperate issue from whether or not bases require CoV. If you enjoyed the last year, then it was worth it. If you don't want to buy another game, then it's not worth it to you to buy another game. No shame either way.

[ QUOTE ]
We are also looking at some other options for "instant raids" for pick up play, but again finding ways to keep things from being a no-fun grief fest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oooh, good point. The current base raid system doesn't have to be the *only* system. That could be used for big raids, and then other types of raids could satisfy the sneak attack style or the quick fun style of Team PvP.

For sneak attack style fun, what if some groups designed bases specifically for being attacked when nobody was there? Basically they'd be just making their own little level for the game. They'd flag how many people it is designed for (2-4 or 6-8, for example) and then open it up for buisiness.

Any time the base is empty, the base would then go on a list of available stealth attack bases. People would be able to select it from the terminal in their own bases and warp in to run the gauntlet. The base architect gets rewards for how many groups attack his base, with bigger rewards for how long it takes the enemies to get to the "Prize" at the end. The prize regenerates for new teams, so as many people can try it as want to. The teams get scored on how fast they get the prize.

Make that one have no real in-game advantage. Just make it a fun thing like playing Capture the Flag in a Half-Life mod, and I'd play a ton of it. There'd be no need to exploit it that way, just a bunch of people seeing how well they could do against the villian's lair.

[ QUOTE ]
I boggle that this thread still exists.

I'm not upset by it, mind you.

[/ QUOTE ]

It probably has something to do with CuppaJo's comments about the board mantenence not working properly lately.

Without an appointment system, this is what I see happening.

You set a time for your supergroup to show up. You spend 20 minutes waiting for 40 people and then another 10 minutes organizing all the teams.

Then you go to the enemy base and defeat the 3 people there in 2 minutes. The vast majority of your supergroup never actually do anything.

30 minutes of setup for 2 minutes of lame action. That seems like a real possibility without appointments.

[ QUOTE ]
Every other MMO has base raids and such without the need for this appointment booking system. Even SWG had the solution of bases only being vulnerable during a 3 hour window each day at the same time which is kept secret and could be altered by placing the base again.

[/ QUOTE ]

How well did those other systems work out? Do people do raids a lot? I know that there are several things in SWG that exist (proving that it can be done), but they're crap, so nobody uses them. Is this like that, or do SWG bases get raided regularly?

Are those raids small (4 people on each side) or are they as big as two Supergroups duking it out?

Retcon!

[ QUOTE ]
Every issue we add new mission tech as well as new art. We aren't planning on changing that anytime soon!

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that you don't *use* the new stuff enough.

After Issue 2 added new tilesets, I started a new character. I got a mission that said the Hellions were in an abandoned office building. Great! That's one of the new ones!

Nope. Same old abandonded office building that I'd already seen many dozens of times with my main character. Even though the mission description perfectly matched the new tileset, it wasn't used.

Through the life of the new character I got 4 hellions missions set in an abandoned office. Only 1 of the four used the new tileset. This is *mindnumbing*. I've seen the same office and warehouse so many times I can't stand them anymore.

I know you want each mission to eventually have its own art. Until then, please spread around the new ones. If you make *every* hellions mission in an abdoned office use the new set, and *every* freakshow mission in a warehouse they've taken over use their new set, that would be a massive imporvement. You can still go back later and change some of those missions if you add another new tileset.

For only a little more work (reletive to making completely new tilesets) you could massively reduce the monotony of the game.

Another thing you could do is add more general tilesets. Instead of adding a very specific tileset to the next update (like the "tunnels" that mainly work in the Hollows), add another super-generic tileset. Like another office. Add a different office and then make half the offices in the game use that set instead of the old one. That alone would be a gigantic improvement.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

NPCs and Minions use different models than players. They also don't do nearly as much stuff or use any of the costume pieces, so that wouldn't be a useful way to test the new body types.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your standard male humanoid thug seems to be able to do just about everything players can do, and then some--play the bongos, use a pick, use a shovel, levitate books, steal stereo speakers, walk... If you play around with the MOV commands in recorded demos, you can make them do our actions and we PCs can take some of their insanely cool moves--like sitting on a trash can!

[/ QUOTE ]

All right. I'll simplify my statement to: It won't happen that way because only players use those models and can test out the costume options with them.

Better?