Egos_Shadow

[ QUOTE ]
We don't seem to have an Avatar of Peace in our SG. He didn't quit, we're all just lieutennants somehow. I don't know if this is the problem or what

[/ QUOTE ]

The auto-demotion code is supposed to sort that out, so that the SG can never have an inactive leader, and can never be leaderless... You may want to petition and see if a GM can help shed some light on the subject.

[ QUOTE ]
Oh and 1 more question, if i schedule a base raid, when the opposing SG comes to my base , where do they spawn??? the Raid teleporter room or secret entrance or where???

[/ QUOTE ]

Raiders spawn in the "doorways" between rooms. The more doorways you have, the more spawn points they have available. IIRC, currently whatever spawn point they get when they first zone in is where they'll keep spawning from then on.

[ QUOTE ]
Can I delete my base?

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately no. You can sell all the parts of it but the entry room, but once you've created a base, the only way to get it to totally go away is disband and reform the SG.

[ QUOTE ]
Q22: When I'm placing decorations, how do I put things on top of other things?
A22: Practice.

uh ok. can someone elaborate on this question, and sorry if it has been answered already I'm not gonna read over every post : (

can some items not be placed on other items? what items can be?

[/ QUOTE ]

At the time I wrote the guide, this feature was still being fixed (it was still pretty buggy when we emerged from beta). That was just a silly little response meaning "answer hazy". A canonical guide for what things can be placed on top of what other things would be rather involved.

Since the various fixes to it, it seems like, for the most part, most small items can be placed on top of most flat-topped desk items. Desk items which already have something on them are iffy.

Full-size items can't be stacked, as far as I can tell. You can have an item connected to the floor and an item connected to the ceiling in the same space, but not literally atop each other.

[ QUOTE ]
It's overdue and I for one am tired of getting another "you misunderstood us" from the developers.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I find eye-gougingly infuriating about a lot of these instances is that they're the kind of thing that could be sorted out with a few back and forth emails to the tune of "no, seriously - is that the only effect of X?" or "you realize that your definition of Y and the definition used by the entire player base are completely different, right?"

I'm in that situation a lot at my company and it's a giant pain in the rear constantly getting added on email threads like "hey, we found this thing... is it a feature... we're not really sure what's going on here... w-t-f?" It's a pain, but it's necessary to keep everyone on the same page.

Actually, it's part of the disconnect between the developers of a system and the users. The developer, who sees the code, modules and hardware which creates the final system, thinks of it in individual parts, whereas the user sees only the final system, and generally thinks of it as one entity.

The problem is that statements which come from inside the black box, which are technically truths from the developer's standpoint, are often difficult to understand from the user's standpoint, where we see only the surface of the black box. The "we're done with power changes" fiasco was just the most glaring example of this problem as applied to CoH; it's a communications issue which affects almost any system, anywhere, unless someone is put to the task of reconciling the view from inside and outside.

[ QUOTE ]
The mag 100 Stun is being replaced with a more standard stun (duration based, normal magnitude.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Castle & Geko for President in 2008!

Motto: "Stuff gets fixed."

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I remember it the same as well. It sucks that the Devs are actually human and can leave out information. What we need is robots who come in here and give out conned information so everything that people might assume on their own accord would be clear to begin with.

Since it was the players themselves who came up with the idea that the base would still be usable and no Dev actually came out and said it, seems like it is the players' fault everyone is upset. But players' (myself included) obviously can't be blamed for giving themselves misinformation even though that is what happened.

So Boo you Devs for being human again. Boo I say.


[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, come off it.

The normal excuse of free content updates doesn't apply to CoV - and bases. This was an expansion we paid for. For a not inconsequential number of people, the only reason they bought CoV was to participate in base functionality. People deserve to have as complete a set of information as possible on the products they are paying money for. To not merely leave it undocumented, but knowingly allow players and game information sites to misinterpret comments, when that misinterpretation is likely to sway more people into buying your product, is simply wrong.

I don't expect full documentation on random patches or free content updates. I mean, after all, they're free.

I DO expect full and ACCURATE documentation on features listed right on the box as a selling point of something that I'm PAYING FOR.

[ QUOTE ]
1) Longbow have an XP Bonus

[/ QUOTE ]

Rularuu and Vahzilok have an XP bonus too, but none of them have magical "I win" powers.

Automatic toggle-drop? Sometimes I wonder about the designers.

[ QUOTE ]
Is this fair?

[/ QUOTE ]

The base system is not optimized for fairness, it's optimized for grinding. Your expectations, like mine, were set at a level which was entirely too close to reasonable.

[ QUOTE ]
If you don't pay rent for long enough then you will be locked out of the base.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a direct contradiction of previous information, and what we were told in Beta. Not that I'm really surprised anymore.

It's not that it's difficult to farm. It's that it's STUPID.

I mean, isn't the kill badge (Untouchable) for normal family bosses just a 100-count? Why is Gangbuster TWICE that?

At what point did someone decide "You know what would make CoV perfect? Grinding. Let's put some grinding in."

Whoever came up with the Gangbuster requirement should have to grind that badge out every morning before being allowed to start work.

[ QUOTE ]
I think if TP Foe had a line of sight limitation, it couldn't be exploited quite the way it is now. that may even stop the cheaters TP'ing you into a room that has no exit, like is very common at the hero security gates. Yeah yeah so the drones don't see you, its not like they have sight any better than a streetlamp twilight switch.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not every unpopular tactic is an exploit! This is the MMO equivalent of calling everyone who disagrees with you a Naz-- er, 5th Columnist!

1) Stalkers are mammals.
2) Stalkers like to fight.
3) The purpose of Stalkers is to flip out and assassinate people.

As an additional amusement, you could randomly pick someone from the other faction who's inside the safe zone every, say, 5 minutes and send an ambush after them. And I don't mean a little 3 bored minions ambush. I mean a death squad (anyone who's gotten an oversized ambush in CoX knows what I mean).

The mental image of a stalker fleeing from the three very irritated Longbow Wardens and their dozen or so Eagle backups should bring a warm feeling to anyone's heart.

Mine would include:

* Towers stretching up from the bases with turret spawns. Ideally these should 1) see through any possible combination of stealth, at long range (essentially use the sniper code), 2) use a combination of obnoxiously long plink DoT and web grenades, 3) be on a quick respawn timer. These towers should provide enough overwatch for the base to eliminate hoversniping blasters and telestriking stalkers, seriously disrupt flybys over the spawn points, and prevent the easy use of teleport foe. Essentially, any member of the opposing faction in LOS to the spawn point should be taking plink DoT from these turrets at all times, and get hit with immob/-Fly if they don't get the hint and close in further.

Generally speaking, I'm in favor of the idea that the hospitals should be totally protected, but the rest of the base should be merely very well protected. I would make drones see through stealth, continue to give no debt, and be used sparingly inside the hospital itself to make that area totally secure; but the rest of the base should have defenses of steadily increasing difficulty... and those DO give debt. So if you want to attack the base, it's possible to do so, but risky; the drones then exist as a "bad gamer, this area is *off limits*" marker.

A teleport foe suppressor inside the hospital (so it can't be used coming or going) would probably be nice as well.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't mind going down in PvP fair and square, but gankers, campers, are cheaters. Should be punished. I think the rep to zero thing has merit, couple that with a counter that = 10 reductions of rep to zero = banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with making accusations of griefing in PvP is that pretty much by definition, you're supposed to be beating down the other side. How is anyone supposed to make the judgement of what specific tactical instance is appropriate? I mean, if you teleport foe someone from the other side into your hospital, does he just have to suck up the beating you're planning without fighting back, because otherwise he'll be flagged as having fought in a hospital and risk banning?

Then we get back into the endless cycle of "but you're too close to the base", "but you're hiding in it", etc.

Anyone who's played PvP here in any serious capacity can suggest dozens of ways to restructure the spawn points to virtually eliminate camping. That's the solution, not constant GM supervision.

[ QUOTE ]
Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks there is a problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

There have been how many threads now about this, and you just now notice that?

Both villains and heroes have been complaining vigorously about people camping the spawn points since the game went live.

[ QUOTE ]
Yah, peel off the paint (Stealth) and lets see what Stalkers can do with the rest of their innate tools.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure a lot of stalkers would be happy to avoid the Concealment pool (which gives basically no PvE benefit to them after all) if it meant they weren't spotted halfway across the planet by a nutter with triply-stacked +Perception.

My point really isn't about Hide+Stealth. Hide+Stealth is just the most obvious example of the issue of stealth stacking (Illusionists can also do some mind-blowing things with GI+SI). It highlights the issue, in the same way that assassinate drew an underline under the whole "Hey, 1-shotting sucks" issue. The issue existed before Stalkers, and it would exist were Stalkers to abruptly vanish in a puff of coding, so really, focusing on "don't let Hide+Stealth stack" instead of "don't let ANY +Stealth/+Per powers stack" is letting the forum's tendency to stalkerlock get in the way of a more general solution to a problem that goes beyond Stalkers.

[ QUOTE ]
Exactly, if it were not for Stealth/Hide the whole perception war would be basically neutralized except for Superior invis(I think) and you don't see Controllers one shotting anyone

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, not precisely. What happens is it's an ever-escalating process, where even people who have +Perception in their normal power sets have to soak the Leadership pool *and* possibly buy goggles just to keep up. This happens on both the hero _and_ villain sides, except the villains don't really get the option of goggles.

The side effect I'm more concerned about is that this basically makes power pool stealth almost a waste for everyone. Since so many people are rigged to spot stalkers with stacked stealth, a hapless controller with power pool stealth might as well be naked and dancing on a hilltop for all the concealment value they get for their endurance.

Causing both types of powers - +Stealth and +Perception - to overlap instead of stack, and perhaps rebalancing their base values a little, means everyone gets some bonus from their purchase.

Stacking +Stealth and +Perception is the exact same problem that happened with +Resistance and Tough in the pre-I5 days, where it's balanced when you're not stacking things, but, say, a firetank gets it and suddenly it's "Ooh, resistance cap". It's difficult to balance the base values of powers when people are going to stack them - how do you make them not uber while still making them worthwhile for people to have just one? If you nerf the base, then people _have_ to stack... So take out the ability to stack them in PvP, period.

I admit there are some flaws to the idea, but hey, it's an internet forum. Random brain flatulence is the order of the day.

[ QUOTE ]
I've been around coh two years prior to the launch of coh beta, I have a pretty good instinct for this kinda thing, I have to say stealth/hide is the best candidate for modification, it just solves nearly all the issues if it goes away.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would certainly be interesting if they removed stacking from both +Stealth and +Perception powers - instead of being additive, make them overlap, so only the best one applies. It seems like that would solve a number of issues.

[ QUOTE ]
What i'm saying is that if the majority of people who choose to PvP are deciding to use Stalkers it suggests that the other ATs are underpowered or that Stalkers are overpowered.
As far as I know, MMs are the biggest number of CoV ATs with a fairly even spread of other ATs. If PvP were to follow normal population patterns we would see more MMs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of the other CoV ATs are a lot squishier than people really like, at the SC levels. It'd be one thing if everyone were bored and sitting at the level cap, but when you just get steamrollered all the time, you start to wonder... why should I be here instead of in PvE?

More than simple power, it's survivability that makes stalkers popular in PvP. Villains don't like getting ganked any more than heroes do, after all.

Mostly in PvP I see bubble masterminds, a few insane brutes (I will often see the same brute later happily and repeatedly trying to solo Scrapyard), and an unending horde of stalkers. It's not because nobody else comes in. It's because nobody else _survives_ very long.

To note, I've seen some effective battles at the Siren's Call levels between large groups of heroes and large groups of villains, where there were enough overlapping buffs from the villains to make standing their ground workable. Anything less than that critical mass makes it into a running game. And nobody runs like a Stalker.

[ QUOTE ]
what is the point in having unyielding, which supposedly prevents toggle drops, and then having a stalker come up and each time he hits dropping all of my toggles....that means that unyielding is useless. i wouldnt mind if they dropped my health and killed me that way but dropping my toggles is somthing that should not happen. unyielding doesnt work at all vs stalkers

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, well, that's different.

The more I play in PvP, the more I come to the opinion that toggle dropping is a pointless artifact of the days when damage resistance really did make toggle armor users invincible.

Frankly with the reduced damage resistance, defense, and mez protection of I5+6, I would be perfectly happy if toggle dropping were removed altogether, even though it might make life a little difficult to lose that ability on my stalker.

As long as *everyone* loses it. If you want to drop someone's toggles, bring more controllers.

[ QUOTE ]
stalkers are most definately over powered. i have an invulnerable tank who can sit in the villain base with 6 masterminds corruptors dominators brutes, or anything else except for stalkers and not even lose a drop of health...

[/ QUOTE ]

Take cover! The irony meter is overheating!

[ QUOTE ]
My stalker is to low to PvP yet, but in PvE I at least stay and fight. The whole "lancing" technique just gets boring to deal with in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but it's entertaining as hell for the stalker, and that's what really matters.