Fire_Away
-
Posts
383 -
Joined
-
Quote:I don't know why I'm going step into this too but I'm going to try anyway for the sake of clarfication. I mean no offense and you are certainly entitled to your opinions. But again, in still another thread, you are raising (and I think confusing others with) four very different points:Originally Posted by American_Angel
Actually, everyone, during one of the recent Q&As, Positron said that they were considering merging SGs and VGs. They are "looking into it" and said it's an option if they can make sure it does not "break the system".
So it's possible that those beacons could actually become active in the future.
The True Question
Is this the right thing to do? While the benefits would be awesome (Prestige generated by both heroes and villains), if the game no longer seperates the two, is it truly a "City of Heroes"?
In all my years as a comic reader, I never ones saw a base shared by both the good guys and the bad guys. Yes, I've seen bases taken over by one or the other, but not shared.
And if they take it that far
They may as well do away with archetypes altogether. I mean when you think about it, why do a persons power sets determine if a person is a hero or villain? Shouldn't it be a persons actions?
Consider mutants. If they are born with the ability to turn invisible and fight, why does society view them as villains? Isn't that a form of racism? (in a fictional environment of course; I don't want people thinking I can't tell the difference, lol)
Even worse, if persons have those certain abilities, up till now they were forced to become criminals...so in a way, Paragon City birthed it's own enemies through prejudice.
That hasn't really changed even now. The new zones are a seperate system from paragon, so it doesn't remove the prejudice.
(1) The ability to travel to "the other side" (note: this could be achieved without cross faction sg/vg make up just by giving both hero and villain bases all teleporters) is not the same as:
(2) Temporary access for heroes and villains to a base while teamed (fighting for "a common cause") for the purpose of travel which is not the same as:
(3) Hero and villain cross faction bases (what you call shared bases.) which is not at all the same as:
(4) Doing away with archtypes. (I got what you meant in another thread with the "blaster/tank" reference. But that is more of a balance issue than a good guy/bad guy thing). I'm afraid the horse has already left the barn when it comes to archtypes and being either a good or bad guy. That was the point of GR. A person's powerset does not (any longer) determine if a person is a hero or a villain (past level 20). All powersets, however, should be balanced in their make up.
Each of these is a separate argument. As to how far the devs will "take it" remains to be seen. I can give you a hint where I stand based on your input above... You can call it "City of Potatos" if you want... Just give me those awesome benefits you mentioned. -
Yeah I made a pitch for the relook in closed beta exactly along the lines we've been talking about:
Quote:But then I lost heart and turned pessimistic:Originally Posted by Fire_Away
It's time for a relook of SGs/VGs/bases in a GR world... even if you are going to insist on the hard and fast "rules" regarding no cross faction alignment make up (no mixed hero/villain groups and no heroes entering villain bases and vice versa).
The market merge has already resolved the base storage issue. Base telporters to both the Rogue Isles and Paragon City would do right by SG/VG "tourists" and would facilitate the soloist retaining his or her base after switching sides.
I thought the stated goal at HeroCon on this was to "accomodate as many players as possible". How about it?
Now, with this latest word it looks like the possibly of change is real again.Quote:Originally Posted by Fire_Away
And unfortunately, the reverse is also sometimes true (we are told things that, for whatever reason, don't pan out). I keep wanting to trot out Posi's declaration at HeroCon that the devs were going to accomodate as many players as possible when I specifically asked about SGs and bases in GR. It sure doesn't look to me like that objective was met... but repeatedly bringing that up hasn't so far changed what we ended up with either.
There's like zero indication so far that this has any champion or priority at all (and believe me, I'm sold that it should).
You are absolutely spot on as usual Impish Kat... it's best just to wait and see what happens (but I can't resist shooting off anyway
... thus the Fire_Away moniker and target avatar).
-
Quote:Except to say the limitations are even worse. As a viligante, not only is your SG prohibited from making redside teleporters... you aren't allowed in any villain base that have them (even if you are teamed).Originally Posted by Impish Kat
pretty much sums it up
. -
Please consider adding the following once Going Rogue has gone live:
Bases/SGs/Quarters for Praetorians.
Improved Vigilante/Rogue "tourist" travel via bases.
Changes to "limbo" status upon switching sides (ability for an entire SG/VG to switch and keep their stuff)... especially for soloists
Cross factional hero/villain bases (I know that's a controversial topic but it bears mentioning).
[Edit add: I'll bet you will receive additional feedback on lowering the difficulty and raising the rewards of the "new" Cathedral of Pain too but I'll leave those concerns to be addressed by others with greater experience/expertise.] -
In case you ever had any doubts where bases and sg's fall in the scheme of development priority, the devs now bring you Going Rogue. I will not dispute that some will find a lot to like about this expansion (I know I actually do in many areas)... just as long as you are not looking in the direction of bases and SGs. The results there are, IMHO, as miserable as the base/sg development track record itself has been for years.
There were many opportunities here to do some really good things. GR (especially given the market merge) could have breathed new life into the utilty of bases and SGs in this game. It could have given potential new players (those starting in Praetoria) a fresh look at what it means to join and enjoy an SG at level one (or start one at level ten). It could have given the soloist (and others) a chance to switch sides and still keep their base stuff. It could have given Vigilanties and Rogues better ways to travel "to the other side" via bases. It could have opened all kinds of real gaming and RP opportunities with the OPTION of cross-faction base and SG play. We could have gone a long way toward the elimination of the red/blue "two game legacy" of CoH. In short, bases and SGs could have actually supported an expansion whose design targets switching sides and Praetoria. Instead, we got none of the above.
What we got was the return of a high difficulty low reward version of the Cathedral of Pain. Most in closed beta are saying that, without changes, this will be a "try once and then forget" type of activity.
This doesn't seem like a "good deal" to me. What do you think? -
Quote:I'm certain you and the BBC (whatever that is) have all of our best interest at heart. It's comforting to know notes are being taken on what we say and there's a (your preferred) "list"... but for now we should "zip it". Wow (serious?).Originally Posted by Sidhe_Blade
Just so that I can say it here....
Proposal has been sent and we are waiting to hear back from the devs for the BBC
And while we wait we are making notes of things to talk about. Some of this thread is on the list. Can I say end of discussion for now?
Can I have a look at the "Proposal"? Nevermind, to parapharse the great Groucho Marx I would never want to join a club [clique, committee, etc.] that would have me as a member. -
Yep, I think the OP pretty much covered the subject in a realistic manner. So that leaves us with three options (1) do without, (2) some sort of pvp "farm" arrangement and (3) wait for a change in the requirements to obtain the item. Given the history of the rate of base development change you really only have options (1) and (2) in any near term horizon... but I don't blame ya for raising the issue.
-
Just a couple of other details in case you are interested. The Pillar of Ice and Flame consumes 15 control (no power). Also, it isn't an auxiliary item meaning it does not "attach" to a control source. I have one in a small control room just for it and it works fine on its own.
-
Quote:I don't want to come off like I'm defending the current rent system (that would be hard) but I think you are on to something with the above. I heard a programming dev say once that base files were "zipped" and "unzipped" with use. I know too that sometimes when people go away for awhile and come back they need to petition to get the power turned back on in their base... even after paying the rent. All that implies there is some datamining activity tool based on rent. Again, not saying it's a good tool for the players or that it can't be changed.Originally Posted by Lothic
It's very possible that the Devs store the data that records our base layouts in two different areas of their system. Bases that are currently active may be loaded into prioritized databases allowing them to load quicker. Bases that have let their rents go past due might be kept in a more secondary database so that they won't slow down the active bases. When you think about it there are likely thousands of bases that have gone inactive over the years. Why should those get in the way, so to speak, of the active bases? The act of having to pay rent could help our Devs sort which bases need to be kept in which databases.
-
Wonderful news on the market merge! Thank you from a hardcore villain player. I love this game!
-
Now here's a dev who is celebrating the recent switch from Nerf bats to St. Louis Slammers to better control the player population.
If I am a winner, I permit NC Interactive, Inc. and NCsoft Europe Limited to use my name, likeness, photograph, hometown, and any comments that I may make about myself or this contest that I provide for advertising and promotional activities. I also certify that I am at least 13 years of age and am eligible to participate in this contest. -
Quote:+1 rep. Best idea in the entire thread. I'd like to purchase tickets please.Originally Posted by MrHassenpheffer
When the time is right , and I am watching it closely...
I am going to give Impish Kat a catnip cooler
and then throw said Kat at the devs...
my advice to everyone here...
wait...
then watch the sparks fly! -
I tried. Can't get too much lower fruit than art already done and functional programming already done... unless it's fruit already rotting on the ground and you've pretty much covered that smelly subject. Everything else is going to require at least some effort.
-
Quote:Maybe...I don't want to get into a huge "back and forth" on this but I'm a bit skeptical of the idea that because you can't use AE interface power in bases they are treated like mission maps (It makes more sense to me that AE is treated like mission maps... not bases).Originally Posted by The_Demon_Hunter
Because bases are treated like mission maps, I don't think it will be that simple. If you ever noticed, you can't use the AE interface power inside your base for that reason. This will likely take a little more work to produce something for bases.
Interesting that we have the personal storage vaults, Pillar of Ice and Flame and even an SF villain side. That's all stuff found in zones. The limitations as were explained to me on development are either (a) art or (b) programming. In this case the art is done (assuming CoH world art can be readily incorporated into bases which I believe was your suggestion) and functional programming is done. I'm a lot more optimistic that some sort of "pointer" to trigger a function (even AE if they wanted to) from a base isn't a big deal. But acknowledge I'm not smart enough to know that for certain. -
Let me guess that bringing in the functionality that already exists in say RWZ (trainer, ICON rep, Hero Corps/Fateweaver, etc.) would be fairly easily doable (assuming that what's in zones can be easily transferred into bases... I'm not a programmer though so I'm not sure).
-
The world knows I have not been an advocate of more lists for the sake of listing. But I think this is going to be the new standard by which we measure progress (or lack thereof) of base related development in the future... much as Mad Scientist's effort has done over these past two years. I was so happy to see someone take the time and make the effort to build on what we already had. I salute your organizational skills. Well done.
I'm throwing this out for your consideration. It, in no way, is meant to detract from your superior effort and I'm not sure if it's even possible... just wondering out loud. Can we somehow flag potential "low hanging fruit" suggestions or suggestions that are extremely popular in nature? -
Quote:I'm super interested in how this turns out. Not saying "Switch back nao!!1!". But it would be a sign of good faith if we were to have both the old and the new...or even just the old back again.Originally Posted by Impish Kat
I have been in contact with David about this issue.
While I cannot divulge details of the discourse, I can say in general that he's shown a willingness to investigate it.
If anyone has screenshots of the old beaker rack, it would be very helpful. I've only been able to track down 3.
Please send links to me via PM or here in this thread. Thanks very much.
They don't come much more conscientious and helpful than David... but he's getting hit pretty hard with being responsible for "all things art".
It's a little thing perhaps to some. But it could signal a new era of dev/basebuilder cooperation. Hope so. -
Quote:There was a drunk who was searching for his car keys in the dark under the lamp post "because the light was better there". That's kinda how I feel about "lists" right now (not faulting anyone but fail to see the point of the exercise... I guess you can say the same thing about "ranting"... though I find being upset a little more understandable under the circumstances).Originally Posted by Turbo_Starr
It’s obvious we all share strong opinions on what should be done and what is/isn’t possible. We can’t fault anyone for making another post about it, another list or another attempt to be heard. I admire your passion AA and agree that we should push the envelope.
Who knows what is possible if we are persistent. From my discussions, the devs are following this closely.
If you hear from a dev, can you ask him/her (in the nicest possible way) for a little more insight on where we are headed with development for bases (and kinda when)?
K, talked too much in this thread already (passionate subject of mine). C ya gang. -
Quote:I need to word this very carefully... or it's going to get completely misunderstood. Here goes:Originally Posted by Impish Kat
An excerpt from the transcribed in-game Dev Greet the other day:
We do not suffer from a lack of empathy. There isn't a dev out there (that I talked to anyway) that's saying "You basebuilders suck!", "What you are asking for is totally unreasonable.", "Ain't gonna happen."
Instead, it's almost patronizing. "We are blown away by what you have done.", "We really want to do more for you.", "It's on the list but competing with other stuff." "We'll see." "We wish." "Can't give you a time table." "One day." I even got a "Keep bugging us." response once. So you walk away thinking... well at least they know we exist and seem to have an idea of what we want... and you wait a year.
Interestingly, the answers are pretty close to the same if you are talking about functional stuff, decorative stuff or even raids. So you go to your third meet and greet/Hero Con (three consecutive years) and sit and listen to the same answer when someone asks bout the CoP, decorating, or anything else concerning bases.
The question becomes... NOT Do we need another list? or Why don't they understand?... It's how do bases make the priority cut for development? It's neat that War Witch herself acknowledges us. But when does empathy translate into action? -
Quote:FWIW, I did the PM thing to WW a couple of weeks back too. Pointed out that one word from her... (Suggestions?) was launching the fifth or sixth iteration (and that is being very conservative) of a player generated new development listing. Wondered where we were headed. No response. But I figure her plate is pretty full these days and she did say some stuff about bases earlier so I wasn't too upset about not getting a reply.Originally Posted by Thirty-Seven
My feelings exactly.
As I read the OP... I didn't get the feeling I was reading a carefully written persuasive post... but rather pro-base propoganda. Instead of going all half-cocked and ranting in ugly colors for entirely too long, make a post to assemble grievances/suggestions cognizantly and PM it to WW and as many other Devs as you feel you should. Yes, I am aware that this has been done before, but being belligerant and self-centered shouldn't get you anywhere. Were I a Dev, I would probably put you on my Ignore list. -
Quote:I did the Hero Con thing (and I recommend it for everyone who can go...overall a super positive experience). See thread entiled Base Manifesto (I know you were anti thread pointing but... what are ya gonna doOriginally Posted by White Hot Flash
Any of you show up to a Con where Devs were present and try to talk about these things? HeroCon, PAX? Anything?. Sending PMs and missives and creating reams of threads pointing to other threads doesn't seem to be working. Any of you trying to communicate in person?)
Couple of months after I reported out we had a guy who fully understood and was working on our needs... he apparently left. Boy did I have egg on my face with that one.
People split (it happens). But if what they are doing is important enough they get replaced. Or, at the very least, you get some reassurance. Not in this case. Devs essentially went into and stayed in info lockdown mode (again).
The time for post GR development has or will soon arrive (GR, in a nutshell, was the basic reason given for no recent base development).
We players have mostly since "started over" with the "good, the bad and the ugly" of threads describing what we would like to see happen. But any way you look at it... communications need to be a two way street. -
Quote:What will help then? Another list? A rep who is a player? Cause I am not seeing that as much of a solution either. I'm dead serious. Been looking for the key that will unlock the communications/development barrier we have faced for some time now.Originally Posted by NinjaPirate
While I do agree that bases need some loving, a belligerent and confrontational attitude isn't going to help one damn bit.
-np
I don't even agree with the OP that the priority is more decorative ability... but I do share OP's sense of frustration. Compare the dedicated resources to bases to say AE (another niche community... the difference being AE is a dev favorite). Something is wrong with how we continue to be treated.
A whole issue? Probably not doable. But some real communications and positive action... that would be nice for a change. -
Quote:What you are saying makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. [Edit add: I'm at a loss how some of this escaped the beta process then as you mentioned.]Originally Posted by Feign
It looks like glitchy, pixelated textures that are poorly overlayed on each other, but then are individually trying to be water, but reflecting in wrong directions and refracting things that aren't even in the room.
Even if it's an energy field, big pixels are not WAI. Ever. -
I suspect some of this is WAI and someone's idea of what "looks good". The slow field is afterall a slow field not a water sheet. Beaker racks are supposed hold beakers. Even Manticore's bow, CoT weapons and porter/forge trim might be by design.
But I can't explain away those green crystals though. They are just plain hideous now (and the whole world knows by now I'm not an interior designer). It'll be interesting to see what change (if any) comes of this. -
" I love that dirty water. Oh Boston you're my home!" - The Standells