GadgetDon

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
WHAT??? I know Jurassic doesn't count, but when did they drop Babbage's badge?

[/ QUOTE ]

Babbage never gave a badge in the Synapse TF.

[/ QUOTE ]

Always has since badges were introduced. It's possible for another group to swoop in and KS him (and thus no badge) but the Babbage that shows up in Skyway City as an ambush for the Synapse TF.

I'm hoping this is a breakdown in communication (the dev who told CuppaJo was thinking about Jurassik). If they are removing the badge from Babbage, there's no reason other than pure cold-hearted stinginess.

WHAT??? I know Jurassic doesn't count, but when did they drop Babbage's badge?

And no datamining for TF badges is ridiculous.

I'm so glad that the devs don't give a damn about angering their customers. I must not get this business thing...I thought angering your customers was bad.

They = devs. Don't have link.

They announced it some time ago. I've never confirmed...never really cared for Numina TF.

[ QUOTE ]
Do Numina. You'll get two badges.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you mean the badge for Numina and the badge for Jurassik...not anymore. Since badges are so incredibly valuable they must be given out sparingly, Jurassik in the task force no longer grants the badge.

I sincerely hope that the Devs read these postings and determine that deciding prestige based on time in SG mode in it's current form is not the way to go

Make some changes to SG mode, and it would be fine, IMHO.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If this is a confirmation that you must be in SG Mode to earn prestige, let me add my voice to those saying "That sucks"

[/ QUOTE ]

Something new, to be added to the game, and GadgetDon hates it. Wow, who would have thought.......

[/ QUOTE ]

Specifically...the SuperGroups I've been in NEVER use supergroup mode. Even the special supergroup I'm in where they have similar uniforms and team together for missions don't use supergroup mode. And as others have set forth, there are issues with big supergroups.

Now, from what was seen in prestige points that snuck into the beta briefly, that does look cool. Basically, it seems to be doing something above and beyond the call that puts you at risk. I'll reserve judgement until I see exactly what gets prestige, but it is promising.

I think there still should be some use of influence in there. Say, prestige for the base rent and very powerful hardware, influence for eye candy and maybe minor hardware.

Datamining, as others have explained, is because it isn't measuring accomplishments, it's doing something that has had no known benefit and does have the downside of removing the choice of chest decal (and for costumes that just don't fit with a chest decal forces one on it).

A couple of options that, IMHO, wouldn't suck...

(1) Change SuperGroup mode. Give the leader more choices about what costume is required, from "no changes required" to essentially an additional costume slot. SuperGroup mode lessens influence earned (from missions, defeating villains, glowies, etc., but not selling enhancement drops).

(2) Untie Prestige from Supergroup mode. Instead, tie it to teaming with other supergroup members. The prestige points you earn are multiplied by the number of supergroup mates in the same team with you. So, if you're lone wolfing or teaming with random heroes, you get the base prestige. If you're on a full team of people from your supergroup, then you get eight times as much.

And as others have mentioned, there is a concern about SGs that split into separate subgroups because of the limit. Allow supergroups to form an Alliance. A supergroup can only be in one alliance. They can combine for a base. Good solution for SGs that had to split. And if completely unrelated SGs choose to team up that way...that's a good thing.

There are many new things I like. If you check the Suggestions forum you'll see my suggestions there on a semi-regular basis.

But just tying prestige to being in SG mode as it exists now, yeah. It sucks.

[ QUOTE ]
Just because you're in SG mode doesn't mean you automatically get Prestige. You still have to do things.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is a confirmation that you must be in SG Mode to earn prestige, let me add my voice to those saying "That sucks"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if at all possible, please retroactively give badges for the shadow shard TFs

[/ QUOTE ]

/signed

[/ QUOTE ]

I recall seeing somewhere someone with a red name saying that when I5 goes live they will datamine their databases and award badges for task forces completed that did not have a badge prior to I5. It won't happen on the test server, and based on past experience I'm guessing it'll take a week or so after I5 goes live to be completed (and alas there will be some who get missed), but they will be granting badges retroactively.

Badges need an info button, when looking at your own badges.

The badges for task forces would have what would be the souvenier. The history badges would have the text from the history plaques you clicked on. Defeat badges would have the description of the thing(s) you defeated. Others could be fluff for now, and expanded later.

Solves the problem of lack of souveniers, makes the stuff we supposedly learned from the history plaques accessible, etc.

The goal you have declared you are working towards, Statesman, is that one spawn becomes a challenge, or at the very least requires your full attention to deal with.

If you achieve that goal, then two spawns becomes a very difficult challenge, and three or more spawns will be very deadly. And there are villains where this is already true for my heroes (best example, malta spawns with sappers). If you simultaneously make multiple spawns deadly while removing any way to deal with them individually, that's just wrong.

Stealth has three uses in the current game:

(1) Getting past villains to get to glowies. The one use that could be described as reward without risk, and the use that is least affected by this nerf. It does make villains who can see through stealth change the whole basis...If I'm trying to get through a level and have to pass through a room with a Nemesis sniper, currently the sniper will hit me and the group the sniper is with will aggro, but I can run past them into the next room and keep going. Under this ill-conceived nerf, not only will everyone in the room see me once the sniper shoots at me, but those in the next room I run into will see me. Do you mean to unbalance the villain groups so that those with one that sees through stealth are so much better off?

(2) The second use is to get yourself positioned for your attack, getting the first attack in. This still has some functionality, though again if there's a sniper across the room your position will be revealed to the Fake Nemesis you're near. The bigger effect is that, on live, you get your attack off first, and the villains respond, because you are seen by the group you are attacking when the attack goes off. On test, you become seen as the attack is started, and because NPCs react at the speed of light you get attacked. This is yet another nerf to person-based aoe powers...if you run up to the villains while invisible and use flash to hold them, even if you're able to hold all the villains there, you will be dead because they get to shoot first.

(3) The third use of stealth is to limit aggro. As I said above, with invisibility powers, when you attack, you are seen by everyone in the group of the villain you attack. You are not able to invisibly take out your opponents one by one, this is not risk free. It's managing risk, a risk that you've declared you want to increase to be all I can handle.

Stealth is NOT a power levelling tool. Indeed, given all the effort taken in I5 to kill herding, Stealth is an anti-herding. It is a slower but more cautious playstyle.

You've spoken about how you want challenge, meaning you need strategy. With these changes to stealth, you've removed most of the strategic value of it.

I strongly disagree with many of the changes in I5, but can live with most of them. This change is one I do not believe I can live with.

I am not a tanker, but I team with them regularly on large (8-person) teams.

Taunt being capped at 5 villains will mean multiple team wipes in large groups. It needs to be tripled.

As I said in my PM, if there's ever a COH 2.0, I'd suggest doing away with enhancements.

Stopping after a fight to see what loot you got is something that dungeon crawlers do, not superheroes. Dropped enhancements are ho-hum, finding temp powers is what's cool. I've always viewed Talos as the dev's gift to players who prefer not to fiddle with enhancements, it's so fast and easy to unload and get back to the fight for truth, justice, and the paragon city way.

You're right, caps are a sort of nerf that only affects the min/maxers and leaves the rest alone. That's what many people were asking for in the last round of regen nerfs, a cap on regenneration.

Instead, the key regen powers got nerfed.

I'd be happy if the devs go the route you're talking, but I have my doubts.

What Mr. Emmert should realize is that for HIM rising to a challenge is fun, for others having lead weights added to our feat until rising becomes a challenge is not fun.

The 30s game may not be balanced in his view. But in mine, it is fun.

If the standard truely was "if invincible offers no challenge prepare yourself for the nerf bat", that wouldn't be so bad. The problem is that the standard really is "if anyone with your powerset has less challenge than we want you to have, prepare for the nerfbat." If you're not min/maxing the build, learn now, the nerfs are going to be designed so that the min-maxers are brought to "normal" so anyone less optimized will be subnormal.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
not much in the way in the lvl 35++ content but it looks good

[/ QUOTE ]

DUDE! EXEMPLAR!

Jeezus!



[/ QUOTE ]

DUDE! NO XP FOR EXEMPLER!

[/ QUOTE ]

DUDE! EXTRA INFLUENCE!

Those SG bases in CoV ain't gonna be cheap!

[/ QUOTE ]

DUDE! INFLUENCE DON'T GET YOU TO 40!

The reason people are complaining about no new 35-39 content is because many people run out of missions.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
not much in the way in the lvl 35++ content but it looks good

[/ QUOTE ]

DUDE! EXEMPLAR!

Jeezus!



[/ QUOTE ]

DUDE! NO XP FOR EXEMPLER!

I'm hoping there are a few surprises not listed, like a task force on the par of the Calvin Scott TF except for 35-40, and some tweaking of ranges for Eden and Numina.

The troll event could be like the Clockwork Paladin event, where the badge won't be for taking down the raving trolls, but instead stopping the manufacture and distribution of the drugs.

I've been saying that I5 has to blow me away to keep me in the game, and it looks like there's a very good chance it'll happen. But it's the power nerfs that have me concerned.

That's awesomely wonderful.

[ QUOTE ]
spyritwind2 said, about the regen changes:
[ QUOTE ]
The dev's were never able to back up thier exaggerated claims. They were still determined to make the changes regardless. They were unwilling to admit thier claims were wrong

[/ QUOTE ]

Statesman said, when the mistake was found:
[ QUOTE ]
So what are going to do? First, APOLOGIZE. Yeesh what a mistake. Thank you all for putting me to task. Second, I've put a hold on pushing I4 live until we retest the Scrapper defensive sets (and we'll post the results again). If the changes are too much, we'll roll them back as we've done before. But under NO circumstances will the current Regen changes go live until we own up to our mistake and retest. And I'll continue to interact with the community on the results!


[/ QUOTE ]

. . .I know who I have more respect for.

[/ QUOTE ]

Statesman admitted that the tests were wrong, but they never backed off from their claims that regen scrappers were "unparalled". And the only tests they showed was with a primary that would make Regen look its best.

One more thing...proactive communication can help a lot.

Regenners had been through our nerf war in I3, had a result that everyone was pleased with, then things were silently changed on us in mid I3 (I'll take their word that it was never meant to be live, but we should have been told that the mistake was made and being fixed rather than having to notice it ourselves). We were told that Regen was where the devs wanted it to be. Then I4 hit the test servers, small line about enhancements. Thus the questions--what got changed? How much. Then answers--the effectiveness of enhancements has dropped by FIFTY PERCENT?!?!? based on our calculations. We were surprised and left in the dark a long time.

At whatever point the devs realized that changes needed being done to regen, a discussion should have started THEN. There would have been time to help with crafting solutions (many of us agreed that perma-MoG was a problem but disagree with the sledgehammer solution). Even if nothing changed, we'd have had a better idea of why, and we wouldn't have been surprised.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For instance , since issue 4 got live i have read that the Integration power has been modified . My Integration power on my scrapper is currently slotted with 5 healing single origin enh and 1 endurance reduction enh . I have no way to know if this configuration is optimal without having to get on this forum and ask "expert players" who do extensive testing to get a rough answer. In my opinion i think it isnt a convenient way to inform players about enhancements and slotting .

[/ QUOTE ]

Something I've always wondered...

Why do people feel the need that they *have* to be "Optimal" to have fun? Why does everything have to boil down to the numbers?

[/ QUOTE ]

In I3, I had a definitely sub-optimal regen build that was fun.

In I4, sub-optimal appears to no longer be sustainable.

[ QUOTE ]
The massive regen rates can be a real issue under the right circumstances more so than other meleeVSmelee combinations.

[/ QUOTE ]

While our experiences in the arena failed to show the uberness suggested for non-MoG regen (mostly because our toggles tend to turn off if looked at strongly, and this was when toggle drop dropped all toggles), I don't recall anyone objecting to the nerf taking place in the arena, many suggestions were "let the changes stand but as PvP only"

Just FYI for those who didn't follow the whole Official Regen thread.

I'm sorry, but silence is not an acceptable response when people have lots of questions and concerns. And frankly, when there are lots of questions and concerns, the community has a pretty good track record of spotting what won't work in the live game. Case in point, Uber bosses. Case in point, SS/SJ getting a -50% Acc nerf.

And as for the regen...Geko, Positron, and Statesman all gave the reason for the IH/Int nerf that we were so much better than other scrappers and other heroes. Our testing said that the justification plainly and simply wasn't true, we weren't much better than other scrappers, and other character types could do the things that supposedly was so overpowered, and that not all builds. Finally, the test results that Statesman posted, even with its faults, only showed us about even with SR and below Inv. If the devs found another reason than the one stated by Geko, Positron, and Statesman, we deserved to hear it.

Statesman, thanks for the reprieve for the solo game in I3, pity it didn't stick.

In this post where someone posted correspondence to you, the answer to concerns about the inability to deal with the Malta MINION sappers is "Team up".

So now, the villains you should not expect to be able to solo are Archvillains, Monsters, Elite Bosses, some Bosses (depending upon your class and type) and Malta minions.

You're right. My MA/Scrapper, scrappers being the class described as being able to solo, will be unable to do any Malta missions solo due to the changes in I4.

And, of course, the changes of inspirations to protect you from mez going from two minutes to 30 seconds is going to kill soloing for blasters and many defenders/controllers.

So much for:
[ QUOTE ]
if a player wants to do something solo, it should be CHOICE

[/ QUOTE ]