Hertz

The w00t Radio website is hosting the MP3 format... I don't know whether it's something you can download from their site or if it restricts access only to streaming audio.

[ QUOTE ]
"Enemies become friends"? ... Interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't get your hopes up — this is probably in reference to the Hero-Villain cooperative zone, not anything earth-shaking like the Rikti switching sides and aiding us.

[ QUOTE ]
If the PvPEC turns a FFA PvP Zone into a Teletubby Noob zone playing "Red Rover Red Rover" while singing "I love you, you love me" with PvE'ers....I say we go in terminator style and blow them away!!

[/ QUOTE ]
So would I, man. So would I.

I wouldn't expect that to happen at all. What I would hope for in an intro to PVP event is a teamup of, for instance, Pentad teams. That would emphasize the role of buffing and team tactics. Get a veteran Pentad and 1 or 2 newbie Pentads. The newbie Pentads can fight each other while the veterans look on without interference. Then they can critique afterward and explain what they saw.

Eventually the newbie Pentads could fight the veteran Pentad directly to see what they've learned, then graduate into the open zone. I'd be up for an event like that.

Last night's event was... unconvincing for a new player. However, the Barney-Teletubbie alternative you mockingly propose needn't be the only alternative.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Then polling existing customers is half your battle. Why not do it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you suggest a method that could create an accurate result? AFAIK, players aren't allowed to create polls via the forums....

[/ QUOTE ]
I have already started a thread on an in-game survey in General COH, a survey conducted by players but with some controls in place — to detect pollster bias. I would welcome any additional input there.

If you are hoping for something with 100% accuracy, what you want is a census, not a poll. A census is exhaustive, covering (with luck) every individual participant. A poll strives for a large but valid statistical sample and does have a margin for error. It would still be better than what we have now, which is guesswork and faulty assumptions.

[ QUOTE ]
Third, that data was never used that way AFAIK, but rather to point out that PvP is popular among gamers in general.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't dispute this — I will stipulate that is true for the moment. The relevance of the statistic to this game, here and now, has not been demonstrated. You could say that "90% of MMOs are sword-and-sorcery, therefore this game needs more sword-and-sorcery." That would be a similar application of reasoning incorrectly from the general to the specific.

And to be strictly honest, it proves that PVP is available to gamers in general. You haven't proved that it is liked. 90% of cars are fuel-inefficient and pollute, but that doesn't mean drivers like it — they just don't dislike it enough to do anything about it.
[ QUOTE ]
First, you make several errors in logic here. AFAIK no one made claims that correlated chess players with PvP players except here in an intentionally ridiculous example.

[/ QUOTE ]
But the post above did not specifically excluded chess, either. Statistics like "most games are pure PVP" prove nothing unless one defines "games" and "pure" and "PVP." Chess is all three — has it been included in the definition or excluded? There were no definitions at all in the quoted statistic. Which games, specifically? What is PVP, specifically? What is "pure PVP?"
[ QUOTE ]
Instead what was looked at was the popularity of other 3D online games...

[/ QUOTE ]
Ah, there is the definition, (though none of the supporting documentation). This was missing from the post above which spewed out the statistics as if they meant something.
[ QUOTE ]
What was I doing was looking at things that are a popular in other popular online games and especially other MMO's.

[/ QUOTE ]
A valid goal. Too bad your disciple didn't relay the relevant definitions of your study.
[ QUOTE ]
If I could, I would do exactly this, but again the key question isn't what attracts current customers...its what can I do attract new customers _and_ keep my current ones.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then polling existing customers is half your battle. Why not do it?

[ QUOTE ]
I still dont think you understand. I am saying the PvP Community is a small one; however, the statistics I provided was to illustrate that people love to PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're still abusing your data! How many times must I explain this? Your quote said:
[ QUOTE ]
1. Well over half of all MMO players worldwide are playing on a server with open non-consensual PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]
City of Heroes has open non-consensual PVP, but it would be fallacious to suggest that ALL City of Heroes players are pro-PVP simply because the game has that feature in it.
[ QUOTE ]
2. Well over 90% of all MMO players are playing a game that allows PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]
I stipulate that this is true — the game allows PVP. That doesn't mean that 90% of players like PVP.

Your example is like saying, "100% of chess players have knights at their disposal. Therefore, people like using knights."

Or like saying, "100% of restaurants have napkins. Therefore, everybody uses a napkin."

Your logic remains faulty. Some people do like to PVP — just as some chess players like to use knights, and some people at restaurants use napkins — but you can't prove it using the data the way you do. It would be equally valid to take your cited statistic (90% of games have PVP) and use it to "prove" that gamers hate PVP but game companies stick it in anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
I think you misunderstand my intentions with that data.

It was a direct response to Marut saying:
[ QUOTE ]
Right now, the PvP community really is a small portion of the playerbase, however vocal.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree that the CoH PvP community is a fairly small one I believe it is due to the lack of attention it is given.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is still faulty reasoning — ignoring data at hand.

If the PVP community is big, you can say, "See? I told you it is big."

If the PVP community is small, you can say, "The data is wrong: the community is bigger than this, we're just being ignored."

Such a response ignores the possibility that maybe the PVP community appears small is because, possibly, it might be small. You've already decided upon the answer before you begin asking the question.

Write up a survey and conduct it honestly and professionally in-game. Disallow ballot-box stuffing. Be representative and thorough in your sampling. Know the answer. Don't guess. And most of all, don't ignore data you don't like.

So form a survey committee. Make up a list of non-biased questions, go into the game, and begin soliciting responses. Track the respondent's global handle with their answer to prevent ballot-box stuffing.

Ask your questions in all the major zones on every server. Eliminate duplicate responses (if somebody tries to answer twice with the same global handle).

Write non-biased questions. "Does PVP suck?" is a bad example: not only is it a leading question, but it is a binary answer — there is no room for "maybe" or "sometimes" or "it's good in [insert game] but I don't like it here."

Instead, be specific but bland: "Do you currently participate in open-zone PVP combat? If so, would you say a) more than 20 hours a week, b) between 10 and 20 hours a week, c) between 5 and 10 hours a week, d) fewer than 5 hours a week, or e) never."

Be sure to ask questions like, "Are you male, female, or decline to answer?" and "what is your age?" and "do you have a level 50?" and "how many servers do you play on?" and other background demographics. Also, "Do you read the forums?"

Also, "How often do you play a hero? a) more than 20 hours a week... e) almost never, f) I only own City of Villains," and the corollary, "How often do you play a villain?"

You could even throw in questions like, "Which one item would you like most to see the developers add? a) customized power colors, b) more missions, c) more zones, d) more power sets, e) more PVP, f) hero-villain crossover, g) other."

It'll take a while to gather that information, but the more answers you can get, the better. Everybody would thank you for some solid information on what people want.

You have some very good points, but I would like to suggest that you don't try to shoot yourself in the foot with false premises and bad logic. The statements you have said here may or may not be true — you haven't defined your terms or cited sources — but what follows from them is just plain bad logic.
[ QUOTE ]
1. Well over half of all MMO players worldwide are playing on a server with open non-consensual PvP.
2. Well over 90% of all MMO players are playing a game that allows PvP.
3. There are more players playing pure PvP games than all MMO's combined.

[/ QUOTE ]
You could use this same logic to say, "Well over half of the people in the world use forks. Therefore, we should abolish chopsticks."

Or, "Most of the United States is white. Therefore, white people should be in charge of every committee, because that would best represent the interests of the majority."

PVP is very popular — in certain circumstances, in certain games, depending on implementation and environment and context. Chess is a highly popular sport but it cannot be used as an example to prove, ipso facto, that everybody who plays chess wants PVP in this game. Ditto Monopoly, Parcheesi, cribbage, Battlefield 1942, online gambling, backgammon, and the stock market. They may be considered PVP activities but it does not allow you to make statistical judgements about this population.

I'm not saying you're wrong, or that PVP isn't popular. I'm saying that if you want to win arguments and convert people to your way of thinking, use airtight logic. At best this is just a guess, and at worse, arrogant presumption that PVP is the only way to do things. It's like saying, "The sky is blue, because if it were green you wouldn't know where to stop mowing." Correct conclusion, incorrect reasoning.

If you would like to best have a means of determining how popular PVP is here then I would advocate an in-game survey of some kind. That would allow you to draw the correct conclusions.

I'm glad you're all enjoying Stan and Lou. My hope is to wrap up most of the running gags and outstanding threads in #20 (Boomtown), then start a whole new set of running gags and bizarre characters in #21 (probably Talos Island).

It's from #4 in Galaxy City, I believe. It's also referenced in the Troll Tunnels one.

I've already sent it to DJ Jester, but I couldn't say when he'll have time to update the w00t Radio page.

W00t Radio has had #18 as an exclusive for long enough — here's Stan and Lou in Pocket D.

And while I'm at it, here's Stan and Lou in Steel Canyon.

This thread should have been named "False Dichotomy Theater."

Sorry for the long delay between episodes. This is Hell Week — the ten or so days of intense late-night rehearsal with the technical crew. We open tomorrow (Friday). I work tomorrow, and we have a performance tomorrow night... I will have time to get back to Stan and Lou by Sunday and Monday. Getting home at 11:00 PM every night isn't contributing to my free time.

More like MVM.

Putting stuff on YouTube is an extra step for me. They're audio files. In order to post them on YouTube I have to nail some pictures to them.

The Pocket D episode didn't really continue the storyline and was sort of an extra, a freebie, so I figured I'd let w00t Radio premiere that one. I'm working on #19 now, which involves Stan and Lou and the Steel Canyon fires, which picks right back up with the story.

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand.. buffers and debuffers get turned away from teams because they already have enough of that kind of buff.

[/ QUOTE ]
Considering that this already happens to some degree, I don't see this as too much of a problem considering the potential benefits.

No, Tennessee Williams: "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof," the story of jealousy and family infighting in a grand old Southern family that cannot bring itself to admit that its patriarch, Big Daddy, is dying of cancer; and some members of the family are circling like vultures, wondering whether Big Daddy will grant his 28,000 acres of land to the dutiful son whom he doesn't like or the alcoholic layabout whom he does.

My part is relatively small, so I haven't been needed at every rehearsal up to this point, but as we draw nearer, I'm required more and more.

For some reason I usually get cast in plays where I have to do some kind of accent or dialect. Go figure.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have to agree. Hertz's example was top-notch.

[/ QUOTE ]
The funny thing is, I just reread it and the numbers are wrong. Super Burger and Electric Mayonnaise should start with 25 hit points, not 100.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oops! Good point, I'll go fix that — actually, I'll leave the hit points at 100 and change the number of rounds survived, because that'll be a better illustration. No matter how high your defense, a 25-point attack could still one-shot a 25-hit-point player in the first round.

No Stan and Lou today — we had a marathon rehearsal last night, and another likely tonight. I might be able to do one tomorrow (Saturday) after work and before our cast party.

I'm not completely sure what they'll be talking about, but I know where it'll be set. After all, they can only cross back to Paragon City in a few places.

Next up will be Stan and Lou in Pocket D.

I agree that the game needs diminishing returns on buffs. Seriously. Like, right now. The reason why is best illustrated by going to an extreme example.

Super Burger can only be hit by a roll of 19 or 20 on a 20-sided die. This is 90% Defense.

Electric Mayonnaise can only be hit by a roll of 17, 18, 19, or 20. This is 80% Defense.

They have the same number of hit points (100) and they face incoming damage of 25 per attack.

In the average round, Super Burger will take (25 x 0.10) 2.5 points of damage. Electric Mayonnaise will take (25 x 0.20) = 5.0 points of damage.

Even though Super Burger only has 10% "more defense," he will last about 40 rounds in combat (100 / 2.5), and Electric Mayonnaise will only last half of that: 20 rounds (100 / 5.0). 10% difference in defense = 100% more survival.

Now give each of them a +1 Defense (say, a magic shield, or a Force Field bubble). That +1 shield reduces Super Burger's incoming damage by 50%, but it only reduces Electric Mayonnaise's by 25%.

With that +1 shield, Super Burger will now take 1.25 damage and last eighty rounds, while Electric Mayonnaise takes 3.75 points and only survives for twenty-seven. Who got the better deal by that +1 bonus? Obviously it was of more benefit to the guy who was already way ahead! Instead of lasting twice as long, Super Burger now survives three times as long!

Multiplicative defense, as I follow the math, would be like a +25% Shield instead. Super Burger's damage would be reduced by 25% (so he takes 1.875 damage instead of 2.5) and Electric Mayonnaise would also be reduced by 25% (so he takes 3.75 instead of 5.0).

Change in survival time: with the shield, Super Burger goes from surviving 40 rounds to surviving 54, and Electric Mayonnaise's survival time leaps from 20 rounds to 27.

Get it? 40 is to 54 as 20 is to 27: their survival rates remain equal. Super Burger still lasts twice as long, so the two have received the same relative benefit. A device which claims to grant equal benefit to all now actually does provide equal benefit to all.

I like it. Maybe this means that all-Defender teams can no longer trivialize content and steamroll through missions, but aren't we complaining that the game is already too easy?

It can't be very top secret if Crimson and Indigo aren't using it to send love notes.

Ready for more?

Tune in for Stan and Lou in Port Oakes

Not as much as you might think. I had to re-do lines more often because of sound spikes (like when you say Buh or Tuh or Duh or Fuh or Kuh and the microphone pops). I did practice the lines a lot...