-
Posts
68 -
Joined
-
Quote:Advocating against it entails the same burden. You cannot simply choose to not carry that burden because you don't want to. You're essentially saying 'we should do it this way because we've always done it this way.' You're also ignoring the details of the proposal. Under the proposal, the only names to be released would be those from people who no longer have an interest in playing the game. There is no proof of any substantial negative effect under the current proposal, but there is a substantial benefit to implementing it. The person arguing against a proposal doesn't get to assume it has a negative effect without proof.You're ignoring what I said. I'm saying if I was making the business decision, I have no burden of proof to prove the purge is negative. I'm saying the advocate for the purge has all the burden of proof to prove its positive. In the event of a tie, the purge loses. That is the normal way to deal with any situation with known but unquantified risk, and no proof of positive gain. And that's why the automatic presumption is that the act has no positive gain unless it can be proved. The person proposing a purge doesn't get to assume it has a positive gain without proof.
-
Quote:Partly in response to this, and partly because we're getting into the length of forum that causes people to skip over earlier pages, it might be time for a recap.For my position on it: it makes zero economic sense for NCSoft to do a name purge.
The fact of the matter is, their job is to get $15 a month from as many players as they can. If you're here on the boards posting about how you can't get a name you want, it does not matter - you're still paying $15 a month.
On the other hand, when NCSoft sends out a reactivation weekend, they do so with the intention of snaring lapsed subscribers - the ones who are not paying $15 a month. I'm no expert, but I would be willing to bet that a full roster of characters that had to be renamed is not the most inviting re-introduction to the game.
Basically, the proposal is this. Any accounts inactive for over 2 years, and any characters under a certain level (25 and 40 have been presented) would be eligible for release. Before the release, the account holders would be emailed preferably in conjunction with a free reactivation weekend.
The net result of this would be that anyone who was even considering coming back, would never lose a name. You'd have to skip every free reactivation weekend for 2 full years in order to have a name purged. There are a lot of players that come back for a month or two at a time when they're bored. There are also a lot of players who have no intention of coming back. With this in place, those who wanted to reserve their names could, while those that just don't care to play any more would have their names freed up. This virtually eliminates any negative effect on inactive players, as it gives them the choice to either secure their names or let them be released.
Note: There are currently at least 75,000 inactive accounts, and probably more than that, since that number is based on the peak following the CoV release and doesn't include any who may have quit before then and not renewed for CoV. (numbers based on NCSoft releases, most current numbers for January 2010 not available, or at least not found.) -
Quote:And every argument here can be made the other way with just as much validity. The simple fact that in your opinion, more weight lies in one direction does not constitute proof. To quote, "That decision is based primarily on the presumption that a purge will not positively increase subscriptions." One, this isn't a presumption, its an assumption. Its made without a factual basis. We have samples of proof in just this thread alone, notwithstanding everyone who hasn't commented here that diametrically opposes that assumption. It is a -fact- that when we discussed this in the roleplayers' channel, only two out of more than 50 or so people that have left the game and come back objected to a name release because their names might have been been gone when they came back.You cannot prove the opposite, and I didn't introduce any of "my maths" to the issue. I was pretty direct in saying that without specific numbers that would predict the consequences of this action one way or another, which may not even exist, what facts I do have are enough to make a decision based solely on what will events happen without knowing the magnitudes. The default action when you cannot prove an action will be beneficial is to not do it. If you can prove that the default action when you cannot prove an action will not be beneficial is to do it, you've just proven that the devs should do *everything* that cannot be proven to be detrimental.
People make business decisions based on incomplete information all the time. I do it every day. Its as simple as this: the purge has a chance to cost us future customers. You can't prove it will gain or retain more customers. But I can prove that the purge will not solve the direct problem of people wanting names they cannot have: with very reasonable assumptions you have to conclude that the odds of someone that would have quit if they cannot get a certain set of names actually getting them after a purge (as opposed to another player that also wants those names and may or may not care as much) are low. Ergo, the burden of proof is on the people advocating the purge. Its not on me, were it my decision to make, to fully justify not approving it. From a business decision, the sequence above adequately justifies requiring evidence its actually a good idea.
You're ignoring direct evidence that people who return and find their names purged don't like it. That's not a theory: that's a fact. The only thing that is theoretical is whether that would deter someone from resubscribing, and whether they would mention this fact to other players. And I think there is as much evidence for that as there is for players explicitly unsubscribing due to being unable to find names and mentioning this fact to others.
Both of these seem fairly obvious.
In any case, its not my decision to make so my opinion on the matter means no more or less than any other players. I was simply stating the specific process by which I would make that decision were it my decision to make, in response to the notion that I wasn't taking the proper facts and circumstances into account. I took my personal preferences out of the equation and framed it as a business decision, which in this case I believe it is. And that's how I would make the business decision. In the situation where a decision needs to be made that does not have game design entanglements, you do not need to prove something is bad to avoid doing it. The threshold of evidence to advise caution is low. A reasonable theory that suggests its bad is good enough to stop the process in my opinion. In the face of such a theory, the burden of proof shifts to proving beyond reasonable doubt that either that theory is false, or that the net overall effect of the action is to have a net benefit that outweighs the costs. That hasn't been demonstrated in the case of a name purge.
You also seem to be missing the point. No one is after a specific name. What the name release would do is open up more of the iconic names to people currently playing. If we're going to get into theoretical assumptions, we can also take the fact that one of the main reasons for leaving an MMO is boredom. If you are to the point where you're spending more time trying to get a name that fits your concept than you'd like, and possibly not ever getting one, that would contribute to boredom for very many people. If you would be more likely to stay because it is even a little easier to find a name you can use, then we can make the assumption that a name release would be be beneficial because it would increase the duration of a current players interest in the game, and therefore make good sense to do. So its 'provable' one way as much as it is the other. You're ignoring direct evidence, even in this thread, that what you propose as being likely, isn't very likely at all.
Its perfectly fine for everyone to have their own opinion about things; that's not at all at issue. Presenting things as 'facts' and 'proof' when there are neither is questionable. -
Quote:True on both points. I saw one name in that list that looked like with some changes I might be able to use for something else, but I don't think I'll make a character just for it. Most of my brainstorming is done in my head anyway.Both turorials are adequate as far as teaching mechanics goes, but GR's is far superior in terms of immersion and level design (CoV's likewise is superior, but the starting missions are a bit lacking compared to GR's).
</digression>
Some people find brainstorming helpful (your mileage may vary, but I see a few names among those examples that I might tweak into alts for myself in time for the X2XP weekend). Inspiration can be catalyzed - flexibility is the key.
By the way, as long as I'm thinking about it, where'd your signature pic come from? -
-
Quote:And I can 'prove' just the opposite. Its all a matter of which numbers you want to invent in order to use as a base for your maths. There is no database to pull real numbers from. So until NCSoft releases that information, we'd all be better off staying away from this area. There's no way to prove or disprove that something would or wouldn't be a good decision based on business principles without having a valid basis with which to calculate from. I'm perfectly happy to debate the subject of the thread, though.Basically, I can prove purges create a problem, and I can prove purges don't solve a problem. So that's a bad thing by default without proof the trade is a good one for the game which I cannot prove, nor have I seen a valid proof of.
I'm not saying I'm opposed to a purge because I don't believe people are entitled to those names. I'm opposed to a purge because I believe it creates image problems. I believe the entitlement argument has no value as counter to that.
As for the second part of that, I'm intrigued as to what type of image problem would be inherent to a name release. As stated before, from the sample evidence we have of gamers who have left for a long while and come back, they simply wouldn't care if their names were released. Players currently playing seem to be for it in a firm majority (again a majority of a small sample, but it is what we have). Future players would certainly not mind having more names, I would think. I've certainly never heard any complaints in any MMO I've played in regards to new players having too many names to choose from.
Its sounds like possibly I'm missing something there related to a possible effect to image, though, so I'll await enlightenment.
P.S. I may have failed in making that last line not snarky. So in advance, my apologies; its not indended that way. Its late in the day though, and my brain is shot. -
Quote:GR's tutorial is shinier, but the mechanics are exactly the same as the older two. I haven't heard of anyone who's had a problem with a tutorial in a long while; they're extremely simple, and as long as you actually read the tutorial, they tell you everything you need.This would factor in whatever decision NCSoft makes, however, when it comes time to devote their resources to improving the game for beginning players. The name purge, whether bad idea or good in the abstract, seems like a minor request in a practical context, especially when there are bigger challenges to address. (And GR's truly superb new tutorial and starting missions make the old Outbreak and Atlas Park/Galaxy City missions look that much creakier.) NCSoft has to make a business decision, one that balances their interests with their customers', both current and past, when deciding whether to implement a name purge or assign their staff to projects elsewhere.
Incidentally, as long as there's speculation about stealth name purges going on behind the scenes (a debatable proposition, but one thing at a time), could it be perchance that CoH allows "good names" to be held indefinitely in order to surreptitiously promote more even server population distributions? If someone has really, really set their heart on being "Night Man", surely they will first consider heading to another, less populated server to secure it rather than pick up a thesaurus (or use an online superhero name generator) and try something different?
If they are doing a stealth purge, which I doubt, they have very very odd criteria for it, since many names taken very early are not purged and many names selected later have come free. More likely, those players just deleted their characters, either to start over, or to quit cleanly.
As for the matter of a superhero name generator (even though its completely off topic), since its been suggested a few times, I went to test it out. I have an idea for a character who manipulates time around herself (I have a name already, its Chronoflect). So I went and let the generator run off some names.
First 25: Affection Freeze / Androcrucifixion / Bash Crucifix / Cleric Wrestler / Clonetrickster / Cobalt Crucifixion / Decay Spinner / Extracker / Fatal Rot / Flymorph / Hex Fissure / Interfacevore / Judge Detonation / Machinery Rubber / Matter Counter / Menaceflora / Mind Voice / Mineral Jewel / Minister Photoeta / Mister Deathflora / Saint Heaven / Scimtar Tracker / Silicon Dirt / Sunbot / Ultrasearcher
Second 25: Amethystelectrocutioner / Android Program / Bloody Cutter / Breath Mineral / Burner-slayer / Chrome Howl / Crow Walker / Emperor Hookfatality / Find Electrocutioner / Funerarydove / Game Guard / General Eat / Highwayhero / King Destroyer / Knucklebull / Lockshivering / Metasentry / Obsidian Rain / Rawhideess / Rippereta / Sanctum Punch / Sherriff Dart / Sister Six / Slayer-hero / Small Axe
(I did 8 more lists, but I don't want to spam an entire wall of text, and there wasn't much deviation from the theme.)
One name out of 50 is even -usuable- for the concept (Sister Six), and it comes nowhere close to being relevant (and its taken anyway!). Most of the others are at best joke names (and I'm not big on making joke characters, although I do enjoy seeing them). A couple won't fit in the space available for names. Some of them don't even make sense, such as Find Electrocutioner. Really? I've always wanted to play a hero who's super-power was finding State Prison employees. -__- This generator also has a bit of a fixation of crucifixes and electrocution, which leads me to wonder if the creator of it isn't slightly more death-happy than is quite normal. Having investigated, I can only conclude that name generators aren't going to give you a good name, except possibly on accident. Not that that should be a surprise. -
Quote:That's a good alternative as well. They could do this sort of announcement in conjunction with a free reactivation weekend.Actually, now that I think about it, here's a better idea: same deal, but you individually get contacted two weeks (or whatever) before your second year anniversary of quitting the game, instead of an arbitrary purge date that applies to everyone out of the game for more than two (or whatever) years.. Two weeks after that, if you haven't indicated an interest in preserving your characters, your names become open. This keeps the opportunity for previously held names to become available, but also stops the "Great Name Rush" that would normally be associated with scheduled purges, and make names naturally recycled into the game.
Also, the "Hey, your names are about to go away" email is also an excellent opportunity for NCSoft to offer a player-only 7 or 14 day reactivation pass and make a case for rejoining the game to take advantage of the stuff that's been introduced in the past 2 years.
If no one reserves their names during that, I think its a fairly safe bet they're not coming back. Your computer can be a total piece of crap and still launch CoX. Maybe not -play-.... :P But then all you'd need to reserve the name again would be to log in. -
CO's system wasn't ever really popular with me, and led to nothing but irritation in the RP community there. No one really notices the name@globalname system -until- you get two characters with the same name who both RP in the same group. Its really not a good idea as far as I'm concerned.
In regards to there being a lot of names out there, yeah, there's tonnes of names out there.... if you're willing to settle. If you're trying for a iconic name (that term seems to have been understood by at least one person, yey!) its much more difficult. The vast majority of those went in the first month after launch. The ones that occasionally pop up now I suspect are simply ones that have simply remained undiscovered since the last purge. -
Quote:'Very low' isn't an arbitrary figure. 1 out of 100 would be an arbitrary figure. The ratio of people who have come back and current players is very low. How low exactly? I'd have to spend a year counting so I deliberately didn't use a figure.Quote:Originally Posted by greysquirrelFirstly, the number of players coming back is very low compared to the population.
Quote:Quote:Originally Posted by greysquirrelSecondly, and hopefully this doesn't sound too blunt, but the subject isn't wanting specific names, its wanting some of the more creative names that have sat unused for years to be unlocked.
As far as this thread goes, there isn't even a consensus that a problem exists, much less what an acceptable term of expiration would be even if one were to petition NCSoft about the hypothetical problem. -
I'm noticing something here that i find a bit interesting. I haven't seen anyone who has left and come back have any sort of problem with releasing old names. Several in fact have said that they wouldn't have minded if NC had released their names while they were gone. Then on the other hand there's a group of people who seem to be opposed to it with a feeling that it might not be a good idea because if players return they might be upset. So far there's no evidence toward that point, and growing evidence in just this thread alone -against- that argument.
That leaves me wanting to ask the question, 'Why are are there people not affected by it that are concerned with it when the people it would affect are apparently not bothered by it at all?' Especially since the majority of those same people pride themselves on the fact that they choose names that no one else would anyway. Please note, I'm not saying there's not a good reason to be concerned, I'm just interested in the response. -
Two points. Firstly, the number of players coming back is very low compared to the population. And we have yet to see if they even stay. Secondly, and hopefully this doesn't sound too blunt, but the subject isn't wanting specific names, its wanting some of the more creative names that have sat unused for years to be unlocked. Oddly a lot of people seem to be missing that point. We know the Virtue Name thread is there. Its not relevant to the discussion. Even a lot of the names on the thread aren't available due to players who have left.
-
Quote:I'll buy that except for one point. Veteran players who have been gone for over two years are somewhere else now. They're highly unlikely to come back. Even with all the free weekend and such the vast majority of those players still haven't come back, even for a couple days. For a business to try to recapture those people who have basically rejected them in favour of something else isn't good business sense as much as it is sentimentality.Good will - which is hard to earn and easy to lose - as well as the time and effort of changing the policy on character names in inactive accounts.
Current player have many options, as discussed in this thread, when it comes to naming new characters. Veteran players who return to find their mains generic'ed under some new policy will be annoyed, no matter how well that policy was circulated. Losing their good will, along with the valuable good word of mouth that they can provide, costs NCSoft, hypothetically, more than devising and then implementing an acceptable use-by date policy for names when only a fraction of the playerbase (or whatever value of "a lot" counts as in this particular thread) has raised the issue.
In order to persuade a business owner to fix what a given customer perceives to be a problem, one must first convince them that it's a problem for them, too.
As far as time and effort goes, its just one script, so besides the time it takes to load it and run it, it wouldn't be much. They certainly didn't make it seem very hard last time anyway. -
Quote:That's exactly the opposite of what was posted during the last purge.Originally Posted by DumpleBerryIt wasn't explained--it was one of those off-hand posts in response to a thread just like this one. "It's not worth doing, because it's not effective, because it doesn't free up as many names as you think it would." As I said, maybe it was just an excuse to not run the script.
----
Quote:Originally Posted by KelenarI suppose part of it might be that people in the first few months were much more likely to stick to a single character to try seeing the high-level content, so the number of characters per account is likely lower. And every account had a lower hard limit on characters--what do we have right now, six times as many available characters per account per server as we did at launch? -
Quote:Quite true. I'd love to have a non-nameless non-theoretical non-fictional redname come on and verify one way or the other though.Interesting. That runs counter to my expectations--that the majority of people who have subscribed and subsequently left the game for good did so in the first few months, and that a lot of the really obvious names that are taken would have been snagged within the first few months, so a lot of inactive accounts would also have obvious names on them. I'd love to see the hard data on things related to this (percent of total accounts that were deactivated in the first few months and subsequently deactivated for good, percent of total characters held by accounts deactivated for over a certain threshold...), but I'm a fiend for statistics.
-
The last name purge we had freed up about ten thousand names. I can't recall the exact figure now, as its been too long ago (and apparently posts from back then don't exist when I search for them; if anyone else remembers where they posted the count, can you link it?), and of course, not all of those names would have been names that people are dying to get, but as has been said, that's all subjective anyway. The widened pool would make it easier for everyone to get names they've been waiting on. It wouldn't -guarantee- it of course, but it would help. I know for my part (read as: the rest of this paragraph is my opinion, not saying how everyone should think), I'd rather have a name that was creative, rather than a name I got that was 5th down the list because all the other variants I could think of were taken. Sure, coming up with variants takes creativity too, but its not as satisfying as actually grabbing the name that I wanted to begin with.
In addition, just something to think about, but if someone says that good names are rarely reserved, they're basically saying that they don't have many, if any, good names. If the names were good, by that logic, they wouldn't be reserved by anyone.
----
Quote:Damn you for grabbing Ancillary! Just kidding. I'd tried to get that three times last year, kept waiting for it to go. Good catch though! that's what I get for not checking on it more often. If you decide not to use it, PM me?Originally Posted by bpphantomNo global name should equal the generic treatment at this point.
That being said I nabbed Energized, Prototyped and Ancillary within the last 2 months.
----
Quote:Originally Posted by TrueGentlemanAs for expiration dates, NCSoft would be working against its business interests if it added disincentives for players to return to the game (especially in the wake of Going Rogue). From a marketing standpoint, attracting return business, however old, is always easier than trying to find new leads. Besides, it's always pleasant to see a veteran from CoH's early years post on the board to ask if it's worth reactivating their old character, even if it's Captain Ersatz or Fail O'Suckyname. -
Quote:Very nice way of deliberately misquoting, but a total failure at anything else. If you can't make your point without misrepresenting the other point of view, you have no point to make. If you're willing to settle for an inferior name with odd punctuation and deliberate misspellings, that's fine, but let's stay on point.Still not having a problem with good names, and still seeing a lot of awful names out there. I think I've discovered the true issue at heart here:
Its getting harder and harder to get names with odd punctuation and deliberate misspellings.
----
Back to the actual subject.... There's a lot of names out there that aren't being used, that a lot of people would like to have. I see at least two or three people a day in the RP channel who want a name that is creative -without- having to settle for the fifth or sixth name out there. For example, more than a few of the names on the watch list for Virtue simply aren't ever going to be available because someone made a character 6 years ago, got it above level 6, and then left the game.
And just to address the point for those actually trying to discuss it, if you don't think there's anything wrong with the names you have, that's fine. No one is saying your names are bad. So please don't say that other people's names are bad, especially since you have no idea which names they're trying to get. I hesitated to post this here in the first place because nothing ever gets discussed on the forums without attracting all the trash, but lets keep it on point.
Simply put, if you need to belittle someone or their opinions without reason, then by all means start your own thread and do so. But personal attacks that don't serve any purpose other than to make yourself supposedly look good? Just a little word of advice. Those things don't make you look good except to other losers who think they need to do the same thing. Object or disagree if you want to, but keep it civil, please, and give a -real- reason for disagreeing, cuz this, "Whaaa, whaaa, someone has the name I want!", isn't an objection, its just a very good way to make yourself look really silly.
----
Quote:Originally Posted by PinnyIt also seems like most people here who are against name purges are thinking that the moment names get purged they lose their character completely. You don't. To my understanding, NC has made it so if your character's name has been "freed" but has not been taken by the time you log in again, nothing has changed. If your character's name gets taken, you just have to rename them. Your character isn't deleted or anything like that.
----
Quote:Originally Posted by KaiOh I have found good names, but would I like to have Byakko and Darkwave (globalless names) instead of Bya-ko and Dark-wave? Heck yeah. Some character concepts just demand a particular name and it kinda sucks to know that its not even being used out there, its just sitting and collecting dust.
----
Quote:Originally Posted by mousedroidI'd go for an announced name purge for say
1) ALL characters on accounts that don't have a global name associated.
2) All characters level 40 and under on accounts that have been inactive for 2 or more years.
----
P.S. Yes, Tantalus was what I managed to grab. It wasn't locked. Its a mythological name, so its appeared a few times in comics over the years. But if someone wants to test-poke it and report it before I level it.... -
Oh, I do. ^__^ And thanks Brand for being intelligent, as usual. When I see people say stuff like that, I don't normally wonder. Trolls are fairly obvious when they don't try that hard. And I actually lucked out on a name just today, Tantalus. However, a lot of very good, one might say iconic names are sitting in purgatory because the people who chose them originally haven't logged on in years. I do think a name purge would be a good thing since its been so long, and even people who think they have all the good names they need now might find a few to work with.
-
EDIT: It's been mentioned that I may not have been as clear as I could have as to the goal of this thread. Hopefully this will rectify that. We are seeing more of an issue in getting names. No, its not impossible, but with every name that's taken, it cannot be denied that the pool of names shrinks. The reason for the thread is to gather thoughts on possible alternate ideas from the current naming policy, for the purpose of increasing player investment and satisfaction in the game. (In other words, the more a player likes a character, the longer they are likely to play it. On the other hand, while not liking a name may not in and of itself cause a player to become bored or unsatisfied, with the game, it is a contributing factor. 'I'm just not feeling my character right now.' Is a common phrase that's heard before people disappear. Costumes, names, and power sets are usually the things listed if they're asked. Anything that increases the enjoyment of playing the character is an incentive to keeping that player here and not elsewhere. These things become more important since there are now two other superhero MMO's, and if someone gets bored, they can simply switch to another similar game (even though we all know CoX is better :P ).
So any changes would need to have two goals.
1) Widen the pool of names available for current players.
2) Ensure that players who wish to return are impacted as little as possible.
What follows is a re-summation of the suggestions so far, so that those who don't like reading a lot can get an idea of what's been talked about without wading through a lot of text. Its a sort of combination from several people, and at this point, mostly not mine (I'd list names but I'm afraid I'd miss someone, although if someone else wants to list the names and send it to me I'll list them).
1) Players get contacted in conjunction with a free reactivation weekend shortly before (perhaps two weeks) the second year anniversary of quitting the game, or immediately if the player is already over two years.
2) Two weeks after that, if the player hasn't indicated an interest in preserving the characters, by logging into the game, the names become open.
This keeps the opportunity for previously held names to become available, but also makes names become naturally recycled into the game. If returning or inactive players wish to keep their names, they can do so easily. If they don't, any names not re-reserved could be released for current players to use.
In addition, associating this with the free reactivation weekends would also give players an opportunity to go check if the name they've been waiting on is free or not without needing to check so often.
The negative risk to this appears to be close to minimum since all players, regardless of how long they've been gone, would be able to simply log in and reserve those names again, thereby safeguarding them longer. It also provides a positive for current players, since if the names aren't re-reserved, they would become available to current players.
__________________________
ORIGINAL POST:
Its getting harder and harder to get names that don't require odd punctuation or deliberate misspellings and the like. I know in one channel I'm in I've heard no less than twenty people complaining about it this week alone. The game has been around for 6 years now. Thing is, the vast majority of the good names were taken within the first two. Now, of course, first come, first serve is fair, but I think its about time to release some of the older names that aren't played anymore.
Right now the policy is: "Names for characters below level 6 on game retail accounts that were inactive* for over 90 days were changed to unreserved status. This means that those names became available for new character names if picked by an active (subscribed) player."
We've had two rounds of temporary availability (if I recall correctly) and the last one was just shortly after I started playing, about 3 years ago. EDIT: Apparently the forums have informed me that I joined in October of 2006, so it was about a year after I joined. I hate time.
So I'm just interested in what others think on this subject. Personally, I'd like to see all names inactive for 2 years or more, regardless of the level, become available for current subscribers. Two years is more than enough time, I think for someone to decide to come back, and if they haven't, I think that's a good indication that NCSoft should be catering to current subscribers rather than past ones. -
Frankly, I'm not inclined to RPPvP for most stories at all. Even the name is a misnomer. There's a couple reasons for that.
1. When you're PvPing, you have no time to RP.
2. RPPvP replaces creativity and role-playing with speed-twitch ability.
I have a character who's quite good at PvP, but I don't RPPvP with her. Simply put, she's not supposed to be as powerful as she is in PvP, and I'm not about to abuse a game system that wasn't designed for RP in order to let her win. So while taking a random fight to the arena is fun occasionally (as in, your character won't stop bugging me and I have nothing to do anyway), its not a good tool for ongoing RP, because it forces mechanics not intended to interact with RP into RP, and that never goes well, regardless of whether its an MMO or a pen and paper game.
Then there's the other side of the issue, as to why RPPvP is usually needed. Apophasis does have a good point there, that sometimes, there's not agreement as to where a story should head, and there's no good way to decide, other than the arena. That's a shame, really, but its also more common than it needs to be. That's mostly due to the newer generation of RPers not knowing about (or rejecting) what's called the RPer's Contract (and there's a lot of different names for it, that's just the one I first heard). Probably many who are reading this thread already know what that is, but for those who don't, I'll try to encapsulate briefly.
1. Don't play other people's characters for them. This means ever really, including things like this. (Incorrect: "I smash my fist into your nose." Correct: "I swing my fist at your nose.")
2. Don't godmode. Your character shouldn't ever be able to block everything, dodge everything, always hit, be immune to everything, etc. If you're in a fight, take a few punches. Yeah, you're superpowered. So's the other guy. (Unless she's explicity not, of course.)
3. No meta-gaming (knowing stuff your character wouldn't know on his own).
If those guidelines are applied, 99% of any disagreements can be handled without needing to resort to non-RP solutions. Problem is, players that are actually capable of using those guidelines are becoming fewer and fewer.
If you (and the people you RP with) are able to use those guidelines, you'll never have to worry about needing to use PvP at all to settle anything. If you (or the people you RP with) can't or won't use them, then RPPvP comes in, because all RPPvP is, is a crutch for an inability to resolve character issues through RP.
(In order to keep from derailing this thread, if there's going to be some sort of debate over the guidelines themselves as opposed to the nature of the statement, IM me, or poke me in RPVirtue, or copy the rules to a new thread or something, please.)
Edit: I neglected to mention at all the OP's addressing of RPPvP events. I'm actually for the events, provided they've got an actual story behind them, and aren't just a scheduled excuse to pretend like you're RPing. -
Quote:Hiiii! *waves frantically* Reality is over here! With all your apostrophes! And look! It's a Shift key! :Owe'll see if gr is the saving grace of this game.if it isnt and i suspect its alittle too late then youll see a coh2 become that much more a reality.infact maybe thats what we need is a new game to peak the interest we had 6 years ago.i mean we all know if this game was "the best ever" we would be in the toliet for a playerbase now would we?..no!
CoH is very far away from being in the toilet for a player base (unless that was self-depreciating humour, in which case, I'll admit you lost me a bit). NC doesn't keep games around that are even -headed- for the toilet. (e.g. Auto Assault & Tabula Rasa) Settle down, take your meds, and get back to playing! -
If this has been said before, ignore me, but I've waded through enough posts to drive me more insane than I am, and didn't see it.
The newest version of Mids is slightly bugged. Ninja Run replaces Energy Flight at level 8 for PB's and WS's.
The Fix:
1. Go to menu: Options > Advanced > Database Editor...
2. Open Main Database Editor.
3. Click Inherent in the Group frame.
4. Scroll down and click Prestige_Ninja_Run in the Power frame.
5. Click Edit.
6. In the lower right-hand corner of the Edit Power window, you will see a field named Inherent Index. Change the number from 4 to 17.
7. Click OK.
8. Click Save and Close.
You will need to reopen any characters you already had open in order to see the change. Also, although this has been tried and tested by several people, it is as always, never a bad idea to make a backup before testing changes. -
Here's my little door.
Not quite done with the whole room yet, but that bit is. -
I've found that you can generally make most teams work as long as the people are:
a) Intelligent
b) Awake
c) Sober
(b and c are optional)
There's only two types of person I refuse to team with.
1) Those that don't understand that team =/= run 8 different ways on a map and complain that the difficulty is too hard when they die.
2) People (of whatever AT) that go on follow and spam one or two powers without actively contributing.
Other than that, I'm good!