Eiko-chan

It's possible to be a hero, to struggle to do the right thing and the best thing for the most people, and still be wrong. Being wrong isn't evil; what's evil is refusing to correct when given additional information.

I did edit your post a bit, GG. I corrected your typo. I apologise if you think this impinges on your freedom to spell things wrong.

I would argue that most people with this mindset would more correctly belong to the Responsible Loyalist faction than to either Resistance faction. Wardens want to tear down the system without harming others because they think the system itself is inherently flawed and cannot be redeemed. Responsibles don't think the system is inherently flawed, and instead want to prevent its worse excesses (Neuron, Tyrant) while keeping the system as a whole in place.

Ironically, the Power arc has a lot more to do with tramping down the excesses of the current system than all of the other arcs combined.

There's nothing tacit about it, actually. He's explicit that decisions should be left to people like "you and me" (speaking to the character here).

Two ways.

The first way is understanding without accepting. It's generally called empathy, though many people (mostly those that don't have a lot of it) mistakenly assume empathy means sympathy and acceptance. It's completely possible to understand how someone is thinking, find their assumptions and conclusions entirely logical and reasoned, and still find those assumptions and conclusions wrong.

The second way is based on divergent value systems; this very "Law vs. Chaos" debate we've been bandying back and forth here. To one that does not view individual rights and freedom as paramount (those we'll call "Lawful" for this debate), Tyrant's actions can be completely justifiable. Compared to alternatives - the complete destruction of society and potentially humanity, for instance - the crimes Tyrant commits can be forgiven.

To those looking at the issue from the other side, those that would prefer pain, torture and death to slavery (we'll call them "Chaotic"), no danger can justify the oppression of Tyrant. To these folks, the right to make stupid decisions is more important than the threat caused by the stupid decisions, and so there is absolutely no justification whatsoever that can forgive Tyrant.

I understand your side. I just think you're wrong.

The pallet of life is far less limited than you or the game seem to acknowledge.

He actually tells you, to your face, if you do the Loyalist -> Paragon City choice in the final transition from Praetoria. Cole believes, and not without some evidence to support him, that people, given freedom, make stupid, dangerous, destructive choices - and it only takes one man (Hamidon Pasalima) to make a choice stupid, dangerous and destructive enough to threaten the entire species.

Cole might be wrong in the extreme to which he's taken his conclusion, but it is, at the very least, an understandable, if not acceptable, conclusion.

Because you are Chaotic, and we are Lawful. This whole debate actually serves as ample evidence of the viability of a Lawful/Chaotic conflict that is not necessarily Good vs. Evil.

That argument makes the word "selfless" completely meaningless, and is thus equally meaningless. I don't think anyone has ever understood "selfless" as meaning "completely without any benefit, societal or other wise, for the self".

Two points:

First point: It is impossible to argue reason with unreasonable. When the other side's argument is "You're evil, so everything you do is bad, neener neener", it is literally impossible to have a reasoned debate. The reason must come from both sides.

Second point: The problem with reducing the situation down to being a civil war is that, much like many of these arguments, it grossly oversimplifies the issue. One glaring error those that debate on the Resistance side commit constantly and consistently is assuming that Hamidon and the Devouring Earth are non-entities in the equation. The Loyalist side rarely tries to justify crushing individual rights with an argument that acknowledges the Resistance; Praetoria is the way it is because of Hamidon, not the Resistance.

Beyond that, as far as the information we have can tell us, it is an undeniable empirical fact that at least some of the protections and restrictions put in place by the State have, undeniably, saved the human race from extinction at the hands of the Devouring Earth. Whether all the restrictions in place are necessary to maintain that protection is debatable, but until both sides can at least agree that there is a Devouring Earth problem and that it is one that must be addressed, there will be no reasoned debate, because the planes of understanding of the two sides will forever be perpendicular, not parallel, and we'll all just look like flat, empty lines to the other side.

Only if you incorrectly assume that "Lawful Good" means "Most Good" and is somehow "more" good than "Chaotic Good".

The most infuriating thing about conversations that involve D&D's alignments is this huge misconception that "Lawful Good" is somehow the most good of good alignments (probably based on the also flawed view that Paladins are epitomes of goodness.) This is not the case. One "Good" is not "more good" than any other "Good", and the Law/Chaos axis is as valid a difference as the Good/Evil axis. An individual can value Chaos over Law (and it's clear at least the character you play in these debates does, Evil Geko).

At the most basic, the easiest to understand level, Good and Evil break down to "Selfless vs. Selfish", while Law and Chaos break down to "Society vs. Individual".

Lawful Good is only more good if you also agree that the good of society is more important than the good of an individual.

Of all the points in this thread (or even on the forums of late), this is one of the best I've seen. We often forget not everyone knows our lingo, be they new players, returning players, or even old players that haven't ventured out of their comfort zone enough to encounter all the acronyms we use.

Bravo, Obitus. You win an internet.

One possible exception is the Fire/Dark corruptor (who is one of my AV soloers), although there is a large amount of caveat/luck on there; Fire/Dark is pretty good at taking on large groups and single hard targets, provided those targets don't put out a lot of mez effects, as the combination completely lacks any mez protection aside from defence.

When my Fire/Dark solos AVs, a tray of Break Frees tends to be necessary. It's actually my hope that at least one Incarnate slot will be able to provide mez protection; this was one of the things I thought would be the slight push some builds needed.

Well, no, but that's because the man has the charisma of a cockroach (and just about the same amount of brains, for that matter.)

He's not as clearly Chaotic as the Joker, but the Joker isn't in charge, either. Recluse's rules, in reality, boil down to "don't get caught, and if you do get caught, make sure your plan was audacious enough to be worth the risk." Every single Patron arc involves the Patron betraying Recluse, the Arbiters, or the other Patrons in some way, and none of them end with a disgraced or destroyed PC or Patron, because Recluse still admired the initiative and audacity involved.

Like any Chaotic ruler, Recluse expects to face uprisings from his underlings from time to time, and doesn't hold a grudge when he slaps them down and proves he's still the strongest. Being Chaotic doesn't mean you can't be in charge (just like being Chaotic Evil doesn't mean you can't have friends.)

*facepalm*

You even quoted my caveat refuting this, and yet you still went ahead and said it.

They'd save a bundle on server upkeep outside the two/three months a year when there was a new issue.

But it wouldn't happen, because people like me want to be able to play the game on our schedule, not the release schedule.

Recluse is classically Chaotic Evil. His "survival of the fittest" routine and the fact that he immediately backs down, and shows bare respect, to those that demonstrate strength are the classic definitions of Chaotic Evil.

For the record, my most expensive build is my Tanker (who, like I said, cannot outdamage an AV's regen), at perhaps 500 million. My villains are all much, much cheaper builds (closer to 100-150 million), who can do the deed largely thanks to the presence of -regen in their builds.

While it's probably possible to get any character to the soloing AV level with the right application of IOs and temp powers, some builds do it a lot easier thanks to -regen mechanics.

The biggest obstacles to soloing AV are simply surviving their attacks (softcapped Blasters prove that just about any character can get there with enough IOs) and overcoming their regen (which can be accomplished by putting out enough damage, which can be hard, or by debuffing their regen, which requires specific powersets. Traps, Dark Miasma and Radiation Emission are seem to be specifically designed for the "solo AVs" mindset.)

I'm not sure I've seen anyone else claim this, so I'm going to take credit. And I'm a ma'am.

The Power arc is, hands down, the absolutely best thing in the game right now. Even Bobcat's arc, which is way more villain than the rest, is still great, because Bobcat is just so fun herself. She and Praetorian Eiko (pictured in my avatar) are totally BFF, even if Eiko does constantly shake her head and roll her eyes at Bobcat.

She says something like that in the Barracuda Strike Force, too. Apparently, GW can see the future.

I'm not sure you meant it this way, but your statement sort of implies that those of us that haven't been around since day 1 can't be "true faithfuls".

Whereas I am a Paragon Studios fangirl, and really not that big a fan of Cryptic at all (okay, I hate them).

There are a lot of AVs in level 45-50 arcs. Incarnate abilities could radically change the difficulty of such content as the ITF, LGTF, STF and LRSF, as well.

As for the questions:

1. Inasmuch as the game allows AVs to exist, yes. Strictly speaking, I think any level 50 toon should be the equal of an EB (and so should have at least a 50/50 shot at taking one down), and that's on SOs. IOs should push PCs into AV territory (I think, for the most part, they do.) For the record, I think the game actually does meet this goal; I've never found EBs to be an insurmountable obstacle for any character, though there is a bit of a luck factor for some.

PCs should not pay second banana to NPCs in any game, not even an MMO. It just doesn't jive with my gaming philosophy. At the very least, the PCs in a game are the movers and shakers that affect active changes on the world, even if they're not the most powerful.

I'm not a big fan of the existence of AVs at all, at least not without the explicit understanding, opening shared by the devs and all players, that the AV mechanic is simply a dodge to make the content challenging to teams, and should not ever be taken to be the "true" strength of an NPC. Statesman, Recluse, the Phalanx - none of them are really AVs. They just have to have those boosts because of the exponential nature of team strength growth in this game. Even the LRSF wouldn't be properly balanced if it was 8 EBs versus a team of 8, because enemies don't have the same scalar of growth as players (the LRSF even has to cheat more by making them level 54, and they still get beat because of team power growth).

2. I've soloed several AVs, with several characters. Every one of my 50s can, at the very least, stand toe-to-toe with an AV (the Tanker doesn't do enough damage to kill one, but AVs have the same problem trying to kill her.) While I do it from time to time just to stand as proof that they can, it's not really an "accomplishment". It's more a proof of build than a proof of skill (the three villains are /Dark, /Dark, and /Traps, and thus largely succeed by way of being able to counter the most broken of AV mechanics (regen) directly.)

3. Not knowing all the particulars of what's to come (I didn't see the preview in GR's Beta,) I can't exactly judge how the dynamic will change. However, at least last I heard, not all the slots will be "Alpha Slots", and won't necessarily just be more global enhancements. I'm not sure what's going into the other slots, but I suspect the Incarnate system will be far more likely to make the task easier for those that already can, and maybe push a few that couldn't over the top so they can, than to dynamically change the paradigm such that every Incarnate can suddenly solo AVs.

If he bought a month of game time every time a issue was released, and only when issues were released, he'd get all the same content as the rest of us paying all year. What he'd lose would be access to the game in-between issue releases.

That fact alone proves that we're not paying for content and development, because the only thing we lose out on by not paying all year is access to the game.