Dementor_NA

[ QUOTE ]
...and shot down by the devs .

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd love to see this link, btw.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't disagree. It would take ALOT of man-hours to get done, which is why I'm suggesting it be done as a for-pay expansion. It would have a separate dev team, normal content would still be generated on a normal basis. That said, this game engine is nothing new: it's based around older engines that HAVE been modified to allow for vehicle physics, and very well for that matter.

Nobody who understands the workload this would require is advocating vehicles as a free "issue" expansion, but there is merit for the idea of vehicles as a paid expansion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see your name in red pal, so you really have no idea what the game engine looks like, or any of the coding involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could say the same thing about you, and so the two of us are, in that sense, exactly equally qualified on that subject. You say it's too hard (even for a paid expansion, I presume, since you're arguing with me, and that's what I advocate) while I think it's probably not. In the end, all we know is how much we, as individuals, would like to see vehicles in game. I would pay $40 for a robust vehicle system, you may not.

So the work it would take is an unknown quantity for all of us, all we have are our assumptions. What's really debatable at this point is the value of such a system in the game, so let's focus on that.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bucky, do you care to actually address any of the problems you simply brush off? I don't think you quite grasp how big of a problem these issues that you so callously ignore or brush off are. The dev team doesn't have infinite resources. They've got to focus on specific things. They're not going to devote the resources required to create an entirely new, elaborate system like the one you want because it's just not worth it. Vehicles wouldn't do anything that the current travel powers don't already do and would require a large amount of work for what amounts to only a cosmetic change.

The game can't even do half of what you're suggesting it can (2 and 3). The "can't run on water" problem would cause vehicles to simply disappear as soon as you step in water and that still does nothing to counter the arguments that most of the doors in the game can't even be reached by roads and other ground vehicles friendly paths. Vertical movement is just too important. As to you combat suggestion, the game can't do that either. How are they going to give it hit points if it's a power? You want them to create a completely different mechanic for powers with hit points? That's a horrible use of resources when the game is just fine without them.

[/ QUOTE ]

are you on the dev team? if not remember that this thread is in the suggestions and ideas section. So if you are not going to add to the idea/suggestion then buzz off. Because this thread is not in the "I'm Happy with the Game how it is and want no further progress section" How do ideas and suggestions progress to being in the game? By us voicing our opinions of what we'd like. And by the dev team pushing themselves to make this game ever increasingly better. Let the dev team decide for themselves what is worth it and what isn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

so you don't like criticism. ok take your red ball and leave then. this topic has been beaten to death several times before and you just fail to answer any of the questions brought up to you. instead you just try to down talk people who don't ride your train. let me ask you this, do you want absolutely no new content for about the next 2-3 yrs while the devs try to come up with a new game engine that will allow these things to work? i for sure wouldn't keep playing if that happened. read the reasons as to why this wouldn't work rather then shrugging it off as nothing. had you even bothered to do a search you would have found all sorts of threads about this topic and why it will not work.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't disagree. It would take ALOT of man-hours to get done, which is why I'm suggesting it be done as a for-pay expansion. It would have a separate dev team, normal content would still be generated on a normal basis. That said, this game engine is nothing new: it's based around older engines that HAVE been modified to allow for vehicle physics, and very well for that matter.

Nobody who understands the workload this would require is advocating vehicles as a free "issue" expansion, but there is merit for the idea of vehicles as a paid expansion.

As for implementation, some more specifics.

Vehicles would be available to all players who have purchased the expansion at any level. However, vehicles would begin their lives as fairly slow, fragile, and unable to deal any damage to enemies. End-Level vehiciles would be fast, tough, and loaded with weapons. The game has several options to allow for this progression:

1. Require salvage, recipes, and inf to craft upgrades and add-ons. This would lead to twinking and farming of course, but would link this feature into the game's economy and help to create post level-50 goals.

2. Take up Power Picks Somehow: Force the player to chose vehicle "licenses" from a power pool and have new ATs with vehicles as primary or secondary powersets, though this limits new players from being able to use them "out of the box" with exisitng characters sans a respec. This could help to balance them though, but would also FORCE them to be balanced in line with other powers, lest they become a "wasted" power pick. In my mind, this would limit their use too severely.

3. New Progression System for Vehicles: As you progress you earn some "vehicle bucks" for your vehicle. You can spend these on new weapons, armor, speed, or entire new vehicles.

Also keep in mind, vehicles are not just cars, motorcycles, and hovercraft. They are also horses, unicorns, dragons.

[ QUOTE ]
Vechicle Pls search first.

To quote Memphis_Bill

[ QUOTE ]
There are a lot of problems with the idea.

1. Movement.
Forward and back,even turning - ok. But you can do things that a vehicle can't - such as strafe (direct side to side or angular movement.) It doesn't work with a vehicle.

2. Terrain.
Not every place has roads, or even makes sense for "off roading." Go look at Founder's Falls. Go look at Crey's Folley. Or Eden. Try to get to the north islands in Talos. What, do you have a kubelwagen? Look at the Pit in Sharkshead. Try to use your travel power (car) to get up to some of the doorways in high caves. Cars and motorcycles would be more like Superspeed - horizontal movement, period. And look - I'll be blunt - flat out *stupid* tied with, say, Combat Jumping or Superjump.

3. Combat.
You get ambushed on the way. How do you fight? Just have your powers blast out of the rolled up windows? How do you buff or debuff? EVERY power would need a new animation. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. Then you want people with motorcycles instead of cars. Redo ALL the animations AGAIN. And they still wouldn't make sense - how do you use Footstomp in a car? Or Stalagmites?

4. Customizing.
Yeah, it would come up. Not everyone would want a sports car, or a mid-70s Buick boat, or an exotic, or a minivan, or whatever else.

5. Making "sense."
This was touched on in terrain - how do you get across water? How about the Shadow Shard? And if you want downright ridiculous looking, go do the heroside 25-34 Respec. Look at the Sky Skiffs inside of rooms or the reactor room. It makes no sense and looks *ridiculous.* Something that, yes, the devs try to avoid.

That's just a quick overview of some of the issues with having vehicles as a travel power.


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

In my opinion, vehicles would be an excellent expansion pack. If would be for-pay, which would offset the cost of developing the new system, and yes, it would have to be an entirely new system to be done at all properly.

1. Movement: Simply, each vehicle would move appropriately for their vehicle type, requiring extra programming paid for by the cost of the box.

2. Terrain: Vehicles would only be able to traverse terrain appropriate to the vehicle type in question. Extra coding paid for by the cost of the box, balance vs other modes of travel would based on the idea that vehicle users could have a variety of different vehicle types available to them.

3. Combat: combat while in a vehicle would be limited to the combat capabilities of your vehicle: as the operator you would have no access to your own abilities. As part of whatever cost-benefit system is linked to the vehicles, you could add weapons and fight from inside your vehicle.

4. Customization: Vehicles would be nearly as customizable as heroes themselves. Dev time taken for this would be paid for by the cost of the box.

5. Making sense: Vehicles would make sense. Vehiciles would not be usable in instanced missions, (or at least not most of them, some exceptions perhaps.)

Based on the problems you've listed Bill, I agree that vehicles are not viable for a free update to the game, but as a for-pay expansion set apart from the normal content production I see it as a fantastic idea.

Very cool idea in general.

On the sports rewards: each of the little "minigames" could give a small +End Recovery buff perhaps, or other buffs chosen at random: that's thematic, and something everybody can enjoy. Maybe small insps would drop, or inf like you said. Heck, it could be a range of things, and what you get is random.

Some thoughts on the different sports idea here:

Basketball Hoops: it shouldn't be too hard to make them targetable, and make them the only viable target of a basketball power, but may take quite a bit of time to go through and replace all hoops with the targetable versions. Good concept, but is it worth the effort?

Baseball: I like the idea of pitching to an ally, and if they hit the ball they get rewarded. I'm not sure I like the pitcher getting rewarded for a strike though, kind of messes with the spirit of the thing, and makes it a surefire "someone wins" game.

An idea of my own: football. Like the baseball, except instead of targeting an ally you target an enemy, and punt a football towards them. If they catch it, they look at it for a second, and then try to run away with it. If you defeat the enemy with a football, you get a reward.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really wish the emote pop-up menu picked up more of the newer ones. I forget they are there, and I feel silly keeping a print out of them on my desk.

[/ QUOTE ]

Many of the new emotes are tied to exclusive content such as Booster packs. Our quickmenu system isn't robust enough to discern whether or not an emote is something that you can actually do, so there'd be a lot of confusion for players if the Wedding pack or Cyborg pack emotes suddenly appeared in their quickmenu, but they couldn't actually use them.

However, some of our more clever players have figured out that you can edit the quickmenu on your personal system and basically set it up to do whatever you want. A bit of searching and I'm sure you can find a link to the how to for that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically just altering a text file? Any reason why the updater couldn't add the relevant data if an add-on is detected?

[ QUOTE ]
A couple more questions.

Are the Nemesis Automatons that pose as real people powered by steam? Or do they use some other power source? Since they don't belch steam, and they fool so many people, I'm thinking that they don't use steam at all.

Second question, how exactly does Rikti telepathy function?

[/ QUOTE ]A really efficient steam machine wouldn't need to expel the steam, but would instead allow it to cool and condense internally and re-use the same water again.

[ QUOTE ]
This list seems rather light on negative effects. I work in health care so perhaps I'm asking to much, I would have expected to see worst. Are there additional clues in game that might suggest more?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, "becoming a troll" is more than one side effect: hair loss, skin discoloration, horn-like growths, and drastically reduced intelligence.

[ QUOTE ]
When CoV originally came out, one of the pack in collectors items was a poster with a "villains vs heroes battle scene". On the veeery far right hand side of that scene behind Ghost Widow was a character that was a creepy mixture of Tarantula Mistress and Spider Crab. What was that thing, and why haven't we ever heard or seen from it again? It appears to have been retconned out of existence like an out-of -favor member of the Communist party during Uncle Joe's heyday.

Someone thought it might be the once-mentioned and never spoken of again Weaver One.

[/ QUOTE ]

Got a link?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Issue 14: Indian Giver


[/ QUOTE ]
Wow
Any idea how racist that term is?
And historically incorrect?
Just asking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Native: You can use this land, sure no problem.
European: Sweet, free land.
(3 days later)
European: What are you doing on my land?
Native: Hunting.
European: You can't hunt here, this is mine, you said I could have it.
Native: Dude, totally not what we meant.
European: No backsies! (shoots native)

Not to mention the term "European Giver" could just as easily indicate someone who gives something to someone else in the hopes of infecting them with a lethal plague, and would be alot more accurate.

It would be thematically appropriate to make their camera a buff: +Inf Gained.

More press means more influence/infamy after all. It would also give you a good motivation to keep them alive. Also, a good motivation for you to stay active: the more you fight, the more likely they will be to show up/stick around.

[ QUOTE ]
So my Single Origin'd SS/Fire got 93,750 Infamy per minute on my standard measure thinger.
TopDoc's purpled Fire/Psy Dominator gets 117,000 Infamy per minute on 6-man Liberate.
My SS/Fire in his alternate purpled build gets 115,000 Infamy per minute.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's fine, but my MM makes more than 200,000 infamy per minute. The same farm done by a well specced brute makes about a third of that. Is the mission specifically chosen to fit my MM's strengths and weaknesses? Yes, it is, but I don't find that to be relevant. You can pick something similar for your brute if you like and see if you can get the same numbers.

The problem is, no brutes have access to anything that comes close to Incendiary Swarm Missiles + AoE Immob and/or stacked slows. You just can't match the damage output, and with bodyguard mode on and used properly, a MM can tank much more damage than a brute.

Brutes are just much easier to play. I'll grant that brutes are the best farm characters for beginners.

The Nature of Incarnates:

Statesman is somehow linked to Zeus, while Recluse is somehow linked to Tartarus. What exactly is the nature of this link? Some believe it means is is "Zeus Incarnate" and is empowered by Zeus, a deity. Others hold that Zeus himself was a myth based around an Incarnate, and Statesman simply has inherited the same unit of power.

That said, how does Imperious fit into this? Is he also a Zeus Incarnate (whatever that means) or is he something else? Tyrant has different abilities than Statesman, did he get the same Zeus-Juice and is just expressing it differently, or is his power source different? I know little of Reichsman's powers, but the same question applys.

Myself and others have noticed that every version of Statesman is somehow tied thematically to the legal order of whatever universe they come from: Statesman represents the United States, clearly, Reichsman represents the Reich, which rules over Axis America, and Tyrant is himself the law in Praetoria. Imperious, if he counts, represents the Imperial legal system of Rome. Thematically, the idea that Statesman is "Law Incarnate" makes more sense than the whole Zeus thing. Are we just seeing something that isn't there?

Looking forward to seeing the Reichsman in action. Here's hoping we get Axis America back too.

And if so, by how much?

It accepts slow movement enhancements, though it says nothing about slowing movement in the description or in the "more info" area. Would those enhancements simply do nothing?

My MM can make 2 million in raw inf in 10 minutes.

Yes, MMs can farm.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I were Recluse I'd wonder how I ended up in the only dimension with a "good" Statesman

[/ QUOTE ]

But it's to LR's benefit to be here. At least with a good Statesman who upholds the law and has to follow "the rules" LR has already carved out a reasonable powerbase and can continue working on plans.

[/ QUOTE ]

All versions of Stateman follow the law, and in fact they are all an embodiment of the legal system of their own reality. Statesman represents the United States, clearly. Reichsman represents the Reich, the legal order of Axis America, and Tyrant, of course, IS the law.

My theory: before all the Zeus nonsense, the Incarnates were the living embodiments of abstract ideas. For Statesman and his extra-dimensional counterparts, he is Law Incarnate.

It makes more sense, looking at the theme and behavior of the character, than the whole Zeus thing.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wonder if the multiple-build code is the underlying functionality for the Going Rogue game, only right now we're limited to builds within the same AT. I haven't made any use of this feature yet, but I'm glad the devs saw fit to include it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, I bet you are right. Dollars to donuts it will be something like a build change when you are in Praetoria and then you will have the opposite hero or villain zones available to you.

I wonder how quickly the cooldown to switch back and forth will take, or if it will be like a domination thing where you have to build up opposing faction to activate the switch.

[/threadjack]

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, why would this happen? Why would different build necessarily have anything to do with changing sides?

[ QUOTE ]
1 recharge 5 proc caltrops are ftw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, there's a fifth?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any possibility for some type of acrobatic type of movement as a new movement power?

Kind of like what Sabertooth does when he runs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sabertooth is acrobatic?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he's looking for something more like a feral pouncy run like Sabretooth kept doing in that terrible Origins movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

So it would look like some kind of weird hover-swimming then, just like it did in the film. No thanks.

Nobody with half a brain thought side switching would never happen. Hell, it's a change they've clearly been planning for since CoV launched based on badge names. It's a popular request with virtually no technical limitations: side switching has even occurred already by accident on more than one occasion. So this relates little to other "never going to happen" issues that do not have the same level of popular support or that have several significant technical hurdles.

I have a very pet-lite MM at the moment: he's a ninjas/dark MM that has only the second level of pets, the Jounin. The genin look stupid and the Oni looks HELLA stupid.

He does okay. Nothin like my Bots/Traps or my Thugs/Poison of course

I've got 4 damage procs in mine, including one of the purple damage procs.

It has one-shotted even con minions.

Fear the proc-trops.

[ QUOTE ]
It really makes no sense if the "motive" is too "stop" farming because this does "nothing" to "stop" farming. What it does stop is people from being able to make balanced content especially at low levels as has been noted.

I don't think anyone other than hover farmers care that the critters have a ranged attack. I think everyone cares that said attack is WAY outta balance and presents some serious problems with making balanced mission.

Frankly, its an absurd hyperreaction to hover farming IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]

And now it's just back to melee farming anyway.

If it's cool for melee sets to just sit in the middle of an aggro-capped quantity of +2 bosses and be totally safe, what's the big deal if players with hover can do the same?

As long as we can set the damage type of the enemies in question to whatever we want, there will always be the ability to create total safety for melee characters.