EvilGeko

[ QUOTE ]
Sick because they are so evil or sick because if this was Fallout 3 you would have murdered most of your contacts for giving you lip?

[/ QUOTE ]

The latter.

Personally, I can't wait for Going Rogue. I'll be sending all my villains hero side and can't wait to say goodbye to CoV.

[ QUOTE ]
All the powers you compare it to give the person casting the power the benefits of the buff as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when does insulation shield work on the caster? And GC does help the caster, just not as much as it helps the team.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Taking Grant Cover, one power pick and no additional slot, doesn't in any way gimp your damage. I don't remember the exact numbers, but I think there's about 23 powers and 67 additional slots at level 50.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not about power picks and slots, it's about running yet another toggle. Not having endurance tends to gimp one's damage, as damage tends to cost endurance to dish out. Taking powers to mitigate that, then, gets into the real of costing powers and slots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Remember a few of us take Stamina.

QR

I took it at 28 on my Fire/Shield and use it quite a bit. My only concern about GC is that it's defense debuff resistance should be truly overpowering. Still scaling, but at level 50 it should allow any shield character to soft-cap defense debuff resistance.

Shields are clearly designed to avoid the Willpower/SoA problem. Both Willpower and the villain epic sets skate very close to overpowered. Willpower wasn't intended to be such. It was supposed to be a set with it's mitigation spread among a number of different delivery mechanisms (resists, +health, regen, defense) but it had just a bit too much of everything. Enough that when supplemented by IOs it becomes unstoppable.

Shields is different in that Castle has struck a better balance, but in the game we're playing now that's a bit weaker than most are used to. Besides the change to GC, I don't think it would be out of line for One with the Shield to have a bit more uptime.

QR

I agree that if this were added it would be a great place to make resilience shine.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Added a note to pieces of the Soulbound Allegiance IO set that will warn the player that slotting this enhancement into a pet power that summons a pet that is lower than level 50 will result in the pet not benefiting from the effects of the enhancement.

[/ QUOTE ]
Uhhhhh ...

Does this mean that Fire Imps gain no benefit from this set?

And ... have they ever?

[/ QUOTE ]From the wording of it, it sounds like they never benefited and this is just a text change to make it known.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, but either way, that's very very weak.

[ QUOTE ]

[u]The second you state where the line between 'exploit' and 'fine' is, people will dance on that line and work ever harder on maximizing their rewards as much as possible while stating that you told them it was fine the entire time. [u]It's endorsing it to a certain point, and that's just as bad if not worse then not being clear where the line really is.

The line's blurry specifically to catch people trying to play at the edge, because those people are more likely to actually exploit. People that get their accidentally may get caught in the crossfire, but it's an inevitability in any situation, even when the line is clearly defined. Because some people would get just a little over there unknowingly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you think any of the following actions are wrong:

1) Going 64 mph in a 65 mph zone?

2) Purchasing 4 discounted sodas on a 25 cent super-sale with a limit of 4?

3) Bring in one bottle of liquor duty-free where bringing in more than one subjects you to the custom duty?


Personally, I don't see a problem with someone following a rule to the letter. That's why you set guidelines at a place where you feel comfortable. I really do see your point, but then that's the devs being cowardly. The reason they don't want to give clear guidelines is for the reasons you state, but also because they don't want to later have to amend their guidelines if people skirt right up to the line too often.

I get that. However, that's not a good enough reason not to have clear guidelines. That's a good reason to set conservative and reasonable guideline and give people lots of notice in advance. It's strange to see people arguing for such a plainly unjust practice.

In the compliance and governance realms, setting clear guidelines is often the first step in creating an effective system.

*edited to remove a few repetitive "But then," phrases.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hope the Dom buffs are included.

[/ QUOTE ]

They aren't.

[/ QUOTE ]



Oh well, thanks for the update.

QR

Patching now. I've been working like a madman recently and only by happenstance am at home today. My lucky day!

I hope the Dom buffs are included.

[ QUOTE ]
Issue 15: lolpvp

Oh, wait, that was issue 13.

Never mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Incorrect. Issue 13 was lolpvp 2.0

Issue 4 was lolpvp as PvP has always been lolpvp.

Otherwise known as EvilRyu!

Hope it's a good one.

QR

Why are you guys getting so worked up about a suggestion that has no chance in hell of ever happening? And people who know my posting history understand what a stretch it is for me to say that because I think most things are at least possible.

I don't even think the devs would ever entertain this idea.

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is that redside, the ATs were designed to be more soloable, more self-contained, thus, theoretically, more interchangeable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've personally never agreed with this line of thought. The red side ATs IMO aren't any more solo capable than any blue side AT other than the Defender. Red-side ATs were built around ideas moreso than AT roles or soloing. It doesn't even appear to me that the devs thought much about how the game was actually played when creating red-side ATs at all.

I don't think this is a bad thing, mind you. For example, Brutes are awesome because the devs had this picture of an AT that gets stronger as it gets mad. Cool. Stalkers, which should be awesome, fail even now, because the "silent, unseen killer" just isn't applicable to 90% of the game. They do better after their buff, because upping damage into the stratosphere tends to do that.

Blue side ATs were built and designed around the mechanics of the game and thus are substantially better at the game's tasks. I've no doubt that villainous Tankers, Blasters, Defenders, Controllers and Scrappers will have little problem with the LRSF.

Good idea

/signed

QR

Agreed with the general idea, but it would cause some interpersonal conflicts that are not present now except among the badgers.

Once red-side has blue side ATs, the LRSF will not seem so insurmountable a challenge for a PUG. Right now the LRSF is easily doable for a well crafted team, but it's much harder than the STF for a PUG. This will change and quick with blue strength buffs and tanks.

Issue 15: Revenge of the Fifth.

[ QUOTE ]
1) MA - 100% cool!

2) Dev handling of problems with it - 100% overreacted to.

I figure there's probably one other important percentage to go here:

3) Player Base Upset about #2 - .5%

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you consider when you were making up this statistic that assuming CoH still has 130,000 subs, that's approx. 650 people upset about this? That's actually quite a bit. And if we're defining 'upset' as people who feel strongly enough to actually say something about it, that's even more striking.

My guess is that there's more truth to this than you realize. We can probably safely guess that the majority are at worst mildly annoyed about the devs' recent moves. I'd even sign on to the statement that most don't care. But in any game, only a small number of folks (you'll forgive me for not making up statistics, I like to know what I'm talking about) are deeply committed to the game. Pretty much everyone else is fluid.

Babs said once that the swings in players is fairly broad. There's always people coming and going from the game even if the overall numbers are constant. So in reality the population we're talking about here isn't the whole player base. It's that number of committed players who care enough about the game to talk about it, get others to play it, etc.

So, while you might very well be correct that only 1/2 of 1% of the playerbase is really upset about the devs' actions re: the mission architect, that might be a much larger percentage of your committed gamers. The people who talk up your game, get their friends to play, etc. If you have 650 people ticked off at you and they are among your opinion leaders, that's not a good thing.

QR

As for the evil contacts thing. Phipps is cartoonish. I don't even know why people say he's evil. Stupid more like. That double-crossing Longbow officer in Nerva, Arbiter Daos, and Sister Airia are better IMO.

Hell, Imperious seems more evil than Phipps. You don't "arrest" anyone or "bring them back to be tortured" with Imperious.

[ QUOTE ]

Edit: Still not much information there about how the Fortunatas' powers work, except that they catch glimpses of the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

They, the NWs and Banes are mutants with psychic powers. Why the SOA are naturals is beyond me since it's THAT detail that violates the canon. Phipps arc states that they take kids born with psychic powers and conscripts them. One of the SOA arcs has you go find a natural born psychic and bring her to the Fortunatas.

Born with powers without any other stated reason for having them = mutant

Since Stan Lee came up with that scam that is the essential comic definition of mutants.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1) MA - 100% cool!

2) Dev handling of problems with it - 100% overreacted to.

I figure there's probably one other important percentage to go here:

3) Player Base Upset about #2 - .5%

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree wholeheartedly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah but you're a geek.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Really, the only people who complain about MA are the ones who miss the Rikti Comm farms. The average player still gets a lot of enjoyment out of them. I took my level 11 tank to it, picked out a mission that turned out to be a farm, and got quite a bit of tickets from it. I rolled for about 15 recipes, several trays full of salvage, and got half of my powers slotted. Normally, most of the recipes I'd get would be for common IOs. Here, I was able to frankenslot several of my powers.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is just patently false. I never made a Rikti Comm farm. I didn't meow. I didnt PL toons on the MA. Period. I published 6 arcs over the course of the first few weeks that I'd spent countless hours workin on. All of them were (and the ones still up are) averaging 4 star ratings or above with 20-50 ratings.

I'm still utterly disgusted by the way the devs have handled post i-14 stuff.

The worst part is, people's valid complaints about maps being yanked with no warnings, idiotic changes to powersets on custom critters that make things WORSE, not better, and blatantly false information like the fact that automatic suspensions wont happen when in deed they did...to people who were simply in perfectly legal LEVEL PACTS no less, are dismissed by comments like yours.

Look, its one thing to like a game. It's quite another to ignore when the devs do things that hurt players because it didn't personally affect you.

Seeing how the Devs have publicly responded to this whole mess is even more disheartening. It's like they haven't had a sophomore level public relations or even public speaking course.

I'm not crying DOOOOOM...but I am saying "Please...wake up." Im a long time veteran of the game, have 2 accounts because when my nephew stopped using the one I gave him for Christmas one year I took it over for more Justice slots (pre-slot buying) and spend far too many hours a week on the game. And you know what? i14 has actually made me, for the first time, think about trying Champions online when it comes out.

That's not meant as a threat. Really. But it should say something about the importance of the way things should be handled and the clusterhump that has been i14 handling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you, that sums up how I feel precisely.

The MA itself... I love it. The dev's handling of every single issue that arisen from it... abysmal.

I love this game, but like you I'm seriously considering CO or DC for the first time. I'm not the only one, a half dozen of my SG mates have said the same thing.

WAKE UP! The house is on fire!

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with both posters, but it's DCUO for me.

I actually love the MA like Steele said. I still run my own arcs and a few people who create arcs that I know are safe. But the devs really let me down with their handling of this issue. I was really down on the game for awhile there.

Then the bastids went and announced Going Rogue. Checking off that last thing on my wishlist is a good way to get an evilgeko in a good mood.

[ QUOTE ]
Of course, I would like to hear from the people who put in a badge for 50,000 virtual kills just how we were supposed to accomplish that without "aberrant" behavior.

[/ QUOTE ]

They probably expected you to run your friends and stranger's missions to help them test it to make sure the content was the most fun, story packed missions you could create. Slowly building up the enemy kills over time as you collect amusing stories of how broken your friend's mission was. Then after 6-12 months of having fun, testing dozens of missions while sipping lemonade and chatting about the 'cool' stories that AE makes possible, you would get your badge.



Grounding their expectations in reality is not one of the devs' strong suits.

25+ starts to feel like godmode. That is all.

[ QUOTE ]
They're unlikely to put it up today. If they put it up today, and there's something big that they missed in QA (ie. server crashing kinda bug) then they'll have to leave it like that until late next week, because it'll be tuesday before they can start working on it, and then even when they find it and code a fix it'll still have to go through QA, a process that can take a day or three.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's happened before. But the downside of doing it is that somebody will have to stay around to make sure the server doesn't implode. Lesser bugs can probably wait until next week to fix.