Hydrophidian

Uh... the tips don't get in there unless they're approved.

I'm sorry, by trying to deny this one simple reality--that MA is designed and meant to be a leveling alternative--you've put yourself right into la la land.

Congratulations.

Okay. So you do not use it. You do not use MA. You have tried it in the past, but then stopped using it. You do not currently use this feature. You are ripping on a feature you do not use.

Irony, thy name is "Gloxina".

I'm afraid you're projecting.

Here's a part of my last response that you apparently failed to read:

"What I wish for is changes to the game that are improvements to the experience for the broadest possible range of players. What I wish for is negative impact of changes and adjustments to be minimized as much as possible. What I wish for is not undercutting one legitimate playstyle for the sake of another. What I wish for is targeting the root of a problem, not a particular manifestation of it. What I wish for is a broader range of options; more choice, not less."

Now, when a person states the above, and then you respond with, "if the game were only about you being able to have it your way, I am sure that everything would please you," it demonstrates a complete lack of acknowledgment of what the person actually said. It's intellectually dishonest. It also suggests that you somehow know the person's intent and point of view better than they do, which is absurd. It's also an ad hominem attack.

Throughout this entire thread, you have been pushing for changes to improve your own situation, while callously dismissing how those changes may negatively impact anyone else, and going as far as to deny reality when it inconveniences your agenda.

In short, I'm not the one trying to have it my way. You are. I have already advocated a solution--suggested in this very thread--that addresses your problem, while not disrupting everyone else.

Which you have completely ignored.

And that reinforces the impression that you don't give a damn about anyone else other than yourself, and are so taken with the novelty of your own ideas, that everyone else simply must embrace them. No, we're not allowed to find fault. No, that would be insulting. No, we can't suggest alternatives. It's your way or no way at all.

That you're now trying to accuse me of this attitude--when I haven't even presented my own view on the subject in this thread--is, in a word: laughable.

And I'll point out again: you've failed, your highness. You will never accomplish that goal by dismissing the legitimate preferences of large swaths of the player base. You will never accomplish that goal by trying to deny facts and realities about the game's design and how it is legitimately played.

This is rich, coming from you. Hypocrisy, thy name is also Gloxina (try to avoid Irony, there might be some confusion).

In your very first response to me, you arrogantly presumed to instruct me on what roleplay and this game are about. By the way, in case you didn't know, that's insulting. You then introduced your first false dichotomy in suggesting that character development and gameplay are somehow mutually exclusive. Congratulations, you just insulted anyone who happens to enjoy both. Then you conflated a behavior (farming) with a feature (MA), insulting another range of players by doing so. And you kicked it all off with a straw man: presuming I was making an argument I was not making (which you then went on to counter), when I was only correcting an inaccuracy. Foisting a viewpoint on a person--and then belittling them with it--doesn't exactly fall into the realm of being considerate.

In your second response, you again try to counter a simple, basic, readily observable, plainly obvious fact. And--here's the part you seem oblivious to--by doing so, you continue to casually dismiss the playing preferences of many other players.

That's insulting. The specific word I used here was: thoughtless.

You apparently didn't like that word. In your third response to me, you start in with the ad hominem attacks. Instead of simply acknowledging your error, you try to spin it as a "point of view" and begin chastising me for having the nerve to call it out for what it is: an error. So now you're going to ignore the actual point and come after me instead.

You continue on this track by assigning a sentiment to me that was in contradiction to the one I had actually expressed. Now, not only are you attacking me, you're ignoring my statements in the process. You've opted not to address me, and instead addressed some alternate version of me you've made up in your head. Hey, guess what! That's insulting.

You then try another straw man and insinuate that I am merely unreasonably resistant to change, like so many other unfortunate people. Oh, poor me. Oh, poor, deluded, backwards me. If only I were more enlightened. Then I could see the rightness and truth in Gloxina's progressive worldview.

[dripping sarcasm] Oh, no. That's not insulting. [/dripping sarcasm]

In your next response, you try to paint my "viewpoint" (read: acknowledgment of a fact) as aberrant. This would be an appeal to the people, except that the people you're attempting to appeal to don't actually exist. You then go on to once again condescend to me, by way of ascribing a view to me that I've not once espoused. Not here or anywhere else. Pretty much because I don't subscribe to it.

So, Gloxina... from where I'm standing, you've been outrageously insulting from the word go. And, given that little red dot 'neath your post count, it would appear that I'm not alone in that assessment. I point this out, because you seem to still be operating under the assumption that you speak for some silent mass of players.

You don't.

So, I'd say: get off the high horse. I'd say: you have no business up there, and at this point, chastising anyone else for being "insulting" is the height of hypocrisy. You've been nothing but insulting to me since before I even posted in this thread.

Ignorant: lacking in knowledge or information; unlearned.

You just essentially stated, 'no, I'm not ignorant of the game. I'm ignorant of the game.'

Okeedokee.

Neither do I.

You're welcome to that opinion. You've not demonstrated any "wish to learn" that I can see. Only a wish to shove your agenda down everyone else's throat.

Correction: my lack of concern begins and ends with you in particular. Not "others". Again, that was made abundantly clear in my previous post. The statement: "What I wish for is changes to the game that are improvements to the experience for the broadest possible range of players" directly contradicts a "lack of concern of others that play the game".

So either you did not read that statement (and the others that accompanied it), or you ignored it. Either way, it's just a continuation of your inconsiderate, intellectually dishonest routine.

My lack of concern for your issues in particular is a reciprocal response to your consistent demonstration of total disregard for large segments of the player base that, in certain instances, include me.

You want concern from me, but refuse to demonstrate any in return. Again, I ask: if you don't give a damn about anyone else, why should they give a damn about you?

If all those negatively impacted by your draconian solutions are turned off by them and leave the game, will not the game in general suffer?

It goes both ways.

Again, you refuse to acknowledge that anyone's experience, outside of your own and the minority who might share your issue, matters.

I would rather not see anyone driven away by an issue that can be readily mitigated, or fixed outright, by a change that has minimal impact on the player base as a whole.

Such a change has been suggested in this thread, by Eva.

However, some of the responsibility does still lie with you. If large numbers of people aren't experiencing lag to the extent that you're contending with, maybe--just maybe--the problem is, at least in part, on your end.

Or maybe you need to adjust a setting somewhere.

Or maybe the problem is not AE, but the behavior it promotes.

In which case, it wouldn't necessarily be MA that needs to be changed, if there are less disruptive ways to address that behavior.

See Eva's suggestion up-thread.

If the problem were widely experienced to the extent you describe, these boards and the global channels would be buried with complaints about it, and I'd be seeing it first hand in game.

Neither has occurred. So I'm afraid I have to conclude that the extent if your issue has not been widely experienced.

That said, player congestion does cause lag issues for a not insignificant number of people, even if they happen to be a minority, and AE has obviously brought about more extreme cases of that phenomenon.

I tend to agree that it would be a good idea for the developers to recognize this and take the most unobtrusive steps possible to address it.

What you've suggested is far from unobtrusive.

What Eva has suggested is much less disruptive.


In any event, Gloxina, I'm done with you and this interchange. I'm sure you'll proceed to dismiss, disregard, or distort everything I've presented here, and try to make yourself out to be a victim. It's my firm impression at this point that you're not looking for a dialogue, you're looking for an audience of nodding sycophants.

I'm very confident in the belief that you won't find that here.

Good luck.

That they yield less XP may not matter to the author. It might not matter to a minority segment of players.

But--and this is where the trouble starts--I think it's safe to say it will matter to the vast majority of players.

And that's players, not readers. 'Cuz the context is, after all, a game. An arc is not comprised solely of story content. There's gameplay as well. The target audience is going to play through the work. It's an interactive experience, not a passive one. And if it's a team experience on top of that, in all likelihood most of the participants won't be reading at all. Their enjoyment of the arc is going to come primarily from the gameplay it provides.

So I think, for most people, gameplay is pretty important. And being rewarded for that play is part of the game. My guess is, if the rewards promise to be significantly subpar, people likely won't play an arc. Thus, out go the custom critters. But then, if the gameplay is almost identical to regular content, most everyone will probably go play RC anyway, because the rewards are better (and this is without even factoring in AE's upcoming competition, in the form of new RC).

So, as architects, if this is how it all goes, who the heck would we be creating for? Who would be left? A tiny minority of story-focused solo players?

Seems to me the goal is for MA to be more inclusive and more widely utilized than that.

Sorry, didn't realize you were waiting!



There ya go.

Just as a point of interest, I have been (and it's happened quite a few times since MA's introduction). I've even been the one to say it, on occasion.

But yah, I'm certainly not even remotely typical in that regard.

Had?!

*gestures wildly* Look at all the catgirls!

...

Oh. You didn't mean those kinda kinks-- right.

Nevermind.

This cracked me up.

Wait--

You don't actually believe that the people making "lesbian hellions or clowns", if denied that ability, would suddenly embark on a thoughtful exploration of the potential of the setting, do you?

I mean, really?

You might want to read this forum a little more thoroughly.

Also, let me know when you see the load screen tip that specifically states: you can level from 1 to 50 with Mission Architect.

Excuse me, but who the hell do you think you are? And who the hell do you think you're speaking for aside from yourself?

"We do refer to it"?

Is that supposed to be the royal "we"? You royalty now?

Pro Tip: You don't speak for anyone other than yourself.

And MA = Mission Architect: the game feature. AE = Architect Entertainment: the in-world manifestation of that feature. Both acronyms are routinely used in forum discussions.

Which you'd know if you actually bothered to read any.

Do you even realize that you're ripping on something that, by your own admission, you don't even use?

False dichotomy. Also, a straw man, as I have not made an argument in this thread for "protecting the initial concept of AE."

Okay. I don't have lag issues. So why does my game experience have to be compromised for your sake?

How about you come up with a solution for your problems that doesn't diminish the experience for others. How would that be?

For you.

Which is still the critical point you--in your self-absorbed presumptuousness and conceit--apparently cannot grasp.

You seem to be quite ignorant about this game. You don't actually use the MA system. You haven't played redside. You didn't even know base rent could be paid in Galaxy. And you quite obviously haven't been paying attention to the forums for any significant length of time.

And yet you waltz in here, authoritatively declare a falsehood like, "If there was zero xp earned in AE and no item drops but only tickets earned then AE would be as it was intended," and expect that to stand as a viewpoint?

What?

You conflate RMT farmers with farmers in general, and expect not to be corrected on that? You tag your idea of putting AE in its own zone as "novel", when it was nothing of the sort, and have the nerve to get bent when it's pointed out to you that, no, it's not really all that novel? You blithely disregard counter points, reject and argue factual corrections, make up arguments no one's presented, and presume to instruct, from some delusional position of authority, anyone who appears to disagree with you. And you think that's of intellectual value?

In my estimation, you have consistently demonstrated a complete lack of consideration, and a condescending disdain, for anyone who doesn't play as you do and/or has the gall to point out the flaws in your "ideas" and statements.

There are problems with the idea of removing XP from MA. There are problems with the idea of putting AE in its own zone. If you're just going to brush them off because they don't affect you personally and not give a toss about anyone who might be negatively impacted, why should those people give a toss about your problems?

Got lag? Aw, well, that's too bad. I don't. So please explain to me why I should have to sacrifice so a problem you're having is fixed. Especially when it's a problem you can fix yourself by 1. avoiding Atlas and/or 2. getting a better system.

I mean, this machine I'm on now ain't exactly bleeding-edge. And I play exclusively on one of the most populated servers. If I'm not having lag issues, why're you?


Again, a straw man. And a baseless assumption. I have never advocated "purist concepts". All I have done in this thread is correct your misstatements and misconceptions. Please stop trying to force a viewpoint onto me that I've never expressed. You've attempted it multiple times now. It's getting tired.

Again, false dichotomy.

What I wish for is changes to the game that are improvements to the experience for the broadest possible range of players. What I wish for is negative impact of changes and adjustments to be minimized as much as possible. What I wish for is not undercutting one legitimate playstyle for the sake of another. What I wish for is targeting the root of a problem, not a particular manifestation of it. What I wish for is a broader range of options; more choice, not less.

What I also wish for is clarity, factual accuracy, and intellectual honesty in dialogues about this game.

Thus far, you don't seem particularly inclined to adopt any of those things.

Frankly, at this point, seeing you even use the word "intellectual" borders on being morally offensive to me.

Uh huh?

OMG what's wrong with you?!

(immediately brings the screenshot into Photoshop to organize the inspirations)

That is a fine piece of advice, Sardan.

Move along, citizens, nothing to see here.

Oh my heavens!

You're ME!

...seriously, tho, I'm beginning to wonder how many people are in this same boat. I thought I'd be unusual in this regard, but I keep running into other folks who're coming form the same place: not really MMO players, but have comfortably settled into CoH, and have been here for a while.

My own MMO experience previous to CoH was 3 months of UO, and that's it.

And yet...

...

You found me out!

[insert eye roll here]

Sure they can.

Okay, wait--

Who do you think you're addressing?

We're just players here. We can't force anyone to spam sites.

Are you addressing the developers?

No, that can't be it. They can't force anyone to spam sites either.

Who're these magical beings you think you're addressing?

Your green hue is showing.

Whose market pricing?

Sure, why not?

My question exactly!

If you're riding down the street in your four-door canoe and one of the wings fall off, how many elephants are in an eggroll?

...

Your reaction to this question is likely a fair approximation of my own reaction to your posts.

Whoever these magical, all-powerful people you're addressing are... they're not here.

No one here sets prices on the market.

No one here has mysterious mental powers that can force other players to RMT services.

No one here is preventing you, or anyone else, from gathering the Inf you need to acquire what you want.

I can't tell you how many times I've listed things for X, only to have them sell for X + many more millions.

For example, not too long ago, I listed a PVP IO for 50 mil... which then promptly sold for 200 mil.

I assure you, no mental powers were employed to force someone to pay 4 times what I listed the item for.

So, you're barking up the wrong tree here.

Yesterday, I had a character hit level 22. Said character only had a little more than 300k Inf on hand. I wanted SOs. 300k Inf will not outfit a level 22 character with SOs. I needed more Inf.

So, I went to the AE building for 20-30 minutes and gained some tickets. Then I used those tickets to obtain 2nd and 1st tier common arcane salvage. Then I listed that salvage on the market.

By the time I had listed it all, I had already sold enough to bring me to 1.4 million. And by the time I had bought all my SOs, I had sold enough to bring me back over a million.

All this for approximately 45 minutes of effort on a level 22 character.

People who buy Inf from RMT services are, in my view, full goose bozo stupid. It is very easy to build wealth in this game. You need only apply yourself to do it.

However, I do share your opinion that the prices on certain items are "outrageous" right now.

But that's why I'm waiting 'til sometime after I16 to buy 'em.

Oh, for heaven's sake.

There is no opinion about it.

MA is intended to be an alternative for leveling.

That isn't a point of view. That is a fact.

Discussions aren't the problem. Misinformation and misconception are the problems.

And some people just don't like horrible ideas.

Which, in my opinion, would not be the result of your suggestions.

...

Uh...

What?

For you. You're in no position to speak for the rest of us. You certainly don't speak for me.

Again: custom mobs are a draw for both architects and players. That's been shown to be true.

Thus, if the developers want to incentivize MA to get more people to create stories and more people to play stories--which is the stated intent--significantly diminishing the rewards custom mobs offer is not the way to do it.

Only based on your own estimation and standards, and only in your experience.

This is a visual medium. You might not care. That's fine. Other people do.

When I want to create an arc that's designed to meet your approval, professor, I'll let you know. Until then, I'll continue to use MA for my own enjoyment, and the enjoyment of those I'm creating the content for. Visuals play a role in that. The feeling that we're stepping outside the stock material also plays a role in that.

Your standards are of no consequence to me or to anyone else who doesn't embrace them... which is everyone outside of a very, very minute sliver of the player base.

So, please... stop framing them as if they're anything more than that. It may be appropriate in one of your review threads... but this ain't one of your review threads.

Ah, so anecdotal.

My experience has been rather the opposite of yours. I see more people now than I used to. Several folks on my global list who've been inactive for a good stretch, have returned. My own gameplay hasn't suffered at all.

I think it's important to remember that we, as players, have a very limited perspective. Things change, behaviors change, people come, people go, people shift around to do different things at different times. Not everyone PUGs and not everyone who PUGs uses broadcast and search to do it. When school starts, activity drops across the board. When new content is introduced, people tend to flock to it. When I16 hits, Steel Canyon, Founders Falls, Independence Port, Cap, and St. Martial will no doubt see an upswing of activity, simply because they feature tailors. There will probably be an accompanying lag increase in Steel and Cap. But how many people will continue to blame that on MA? The new difficulty settings will likely bring more people back to regular content (RC). Especially with the impending XP changes to MA. Wouldn't the game then seem more populated to you, even though it's just the same number switching to different activities?

In short, how the game feels to any single one of us is not really a good indicator of anything, because it's influenced by so many factors.

Meanwhile, I've not seen any numbers that indicate subscriptions are dropping. From what I've seen, they seem to have leveled out, and might even be inching up a little right now. Money and resources are being vested into Paragon Studios. Their staff is, as far as I know, still growing. There's a major expansion on deck, and color customization of powers was an ambitious and time intensive project. Not to mention MA itself. I find it unlikely--not impossible, but unlikely--that NCSoft would put so much into a game that was "dying".

This particular suggestion has been discussed at length on multiple threads. There are many issues with it that may not be readily apparent. My suggestion would be to check them out.

Whether they are or aren't isn't really any of our concern.

MA is a different system, with its own particular dynamics. Taking the lack of required travel into account is already part of its design. Right off the bat, all of those design elements would have to be revisited and reworked. I realize the solution you propose looks simple. But it really isn't.

I have no lag issues, blueside. But then, I avoid Atlas as a matter of course, and did so long before MA hit the scene. Redside, Cap is a little more difficult to avoid. But I think Eva's suggestion up-thread is a far more elegant and less disruptive solution to this particular issue.

I don't really consider addressing this problem worth inconveniencing the entirety of the player base. I'm not even sure I'd call it a problem at all.

If a player is comfortable with being clueless and is having fun, I'd just assume leave him or her be. If such an "AE Baby" wants to get out into the wider game, they'll have to expand their horizons. I don't see much benefit in making them do so. I do see a lot of downside.

I don't agree with force-oriented solutions. I especially don't agree with such solutions when they're going to negatively impact my own experience and restrict my own options.

I've been playing this game for 5 years. It's an old game. Consequently, it has a lot of vets; a whole slew of players--very likely the majority--who require no instruction, no introduction to the wider game.

If we want to sit in an AE building from 1 to 50, I don't see why we shouldn't have that option. Personally, I have no desire to do so, but if I really want to skip a section of RC (and take a hit in my leveling speed to do it), MA gives me that option. I appreciate that option. I've used that option. I know of relatively new players who've used that option, because, even in less than a few months, they had already gone through the low-level RC enough times to be a little weary of it.

Any solution that takes that away from us is not, in my opinion, a good one.

Not sure I'd go quite that far. Not yet, anyway.

But do the XP changes, as they stand, negatively impact the people who are, and have been, using MA as it was intended to be used?

I believe very much so.

I do think there is potential in this approach though, so I hope they adjust it further.

You're basing this on what?

...

I think you're going to have to be more specific here.

*facepalm*

ProTip: Anything that begins with "make the players" or "force the players" is probably a bad idea.

However, I'm all for a complete revamp of the "classic" content.

Being done.

The central goals for MA were: facilitating player-created content and providing a leveling alternative. That's fairly well obvious just by looking at it. XP didn't have to be in MA at all. But it is. Thus, clearly, having it be a leveling alternative was a goal. Even if it were a secondary goal, it's still a very big goal and a "main intention" of the system.

So, again... MA requires XP rewards to be "as it was intended". It is, by design, a leveling alternative. You can't level without XP. Thus, MA requires XP rewards to be "as it was intended".

Your initial statement, "If there was zero xp earned in AE and no item drops but only tickets earned then AE would be as it was intended," continues to be wrong. Not to mention, in my view, rather thoughtless.

So, please stop re-asserting it or trying to song and dance it into validity. Especially considering that this thread--the thread you started--is more about rezoning MA than removing XP from it.

The latter "suggestion" has already been beaten into a bloody, formless pulp in this forum and, given the design goals of the system, is a thoroughly dead-end idea. Unless the developers decide to write MA off and just walk away from it, it ain't gunna happen. That dog don't hunt. This... is a dead parrot.

And again, figuring out why the developers are vested in MA being a leveling alternative is a no-brainer.

This may come as an enormous shock to you, but some players don't use MA to power-level or farm. Some players use it strictly as it was intended to be used. Right now. As it is.

Our preferences and playstyle are just as valid as your own.

Even if that were true--which, strictly speaking, it really isn't--those "funny hats" are enough to breathe new life into the experience for a good number of people. Myself included.

It's already been shown to be an enormously popular feature of the system. If the developers genuinely want to incentivize MA story creation and story play, this just isn't going to provide the desired encouragement. I'm fairly sure it's actually going to have a dampening effect on that.

That's debatable.

But maybe you should start another thread with that suggestion?

This is entirely irrelevant to the point.

You stated, "If there was zero xp earned in AE and no item drops but only tickets earned then AE would be as it was intended."

I pointed out the error in this statement. MA requires XP rewards to be "as it was intended". It is, by design, a leveling alternative. You can't level without XP. Thus, MA requires XP rewards to be "as it was intended".

Ergo, the statement, "If there was zero xp earned in AE and no item drops but only tickets earned then AE would be as it was intended" is false.

Whether or not there should be XP is an entirely different argument, and one I'm not going to delve into (again). Particularly because I believe it's completely academic.

For the record, I believe you're referring to the proverb, "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions."