Indomitable

#1 does seem unlikely...and yet...

What if they've found what's broken with the system, but it would take too many programmer hours to correct, by whatever measure their management cares to define as, "too many?" Isn't it normal business practice these days to claim that the problem has been corrected, and hope that perception will make it so?

An interesting analogy. Let's look at it more carefully.

First, professional sports impose measures like team salary caps and preferred draft picks to keep play at least somewhat competitive among teams. You are arguing that, more or less, "If I can afford to hire the whole all-star team from last year, I should be able to." How far would this argument get you in any sports league worthy of the name? I'm willing to support a measure analogous to salary caps in CoH; are you?

Second, professional sports players get paid to play their game. If they are not good enough, then they get tossed out on their butts. In that environment, earning a serious award is a form of professional recognition comparable to difficult professional achievements in other fields. Whether or not that's the ideal setup, it is the way things work.

Here, WE pay to play the game as a form of entertainment on demand. That completely reverses the dynamic of expectations. For one thing, it makes the notion of "earning" anything in-game completely absurd, on par with "earning awards" by watching pay-per-view TV or buying cereal in bulk. Thus, talk about "earning" abilities for our characters is a complete non-starter.

As on-demand entertainment, the game should be fun for all subscribers at all times. A variety of activites in-game is good to support a variety of play styles, but if some aspect of the game generates a lot of interest, then it should be made available to the widest range of subscribers ASAP. Making people do un-fun things in-game to get to the good part defeats the purpose of on-demand entertainment, and drives away potential customers.

I warned that this would happen. No doubt as consensus chooses the clear "best" option for each slot, we'll be seeing a lot more of this behavior. Ain't raiding grand?

LM, I never disparaged Illu/Rad as being useless. What I was trying to say is that Rad gives up some crowd control for enhanced damage-dealing.

Yes, there's a slow, and a huge hold that's up once a month, and some builds can make use of random PBAOE holds, but the toggles are more of an offensive tool than crowd control. They certainly don't stop MOBs from spreading out, often out of the area of effect. Teammates also usually take down the anchors first.

As with defense, reliable crowd control depends on a multilayered approach. Builds that skip a few layers of pure control for enhanced damage represent a tradeoff.

I would much prefer it if no encounter ever trivialized any build whatsoever, but that might not be a realistic design criterion. Hopefully there will be a realistic alternative to BAFs soon.

Well, I've never seen anyone say in the local channel, "I'm rejecting [player] for this TF because he/she/it lacks the right sets."

On the other hand, I DO see people rejected for a team and then made fun of in team chat because the person did not have sufficient set boni listed on the character profile. It happens pretty regularly, though not exactly often...yet.

As a defensive measure to prevent such rejection, I now make sure to play only characters that display impressive set bonus lists. Perhaps the elitist idiots mistake me for one of their own, and find it easier to share their true reasons for choosing teammates.

In any case, obviously skill is preferable to gear in most cases. But when PUGging, how can one determine player skill quickly, easily, and reliably? When assembling a team of unknowns for a race, doesn't it make a certain amount of sense to pick a Ferrari driver over someone on a moped?

From the perspective of efficiency, the elitists do have a point. It's the self-importance and derision that I find objectionable...and completely counter to the inclusive spirit of Superheroics.

This! In my experience, there is a direct correlation between the grindiness of the "End Game" and the toxic competitiveness of the players in the game.

Mark my words, we'll be seeing a lot more of this type of behavior once the BARF goes on line.

Well, not by knee-breaking goons, no; but in a way we are.

Next time someone starts an Apex TF, why don't you try to get a character with an empty Alpha slot on the team?

This is a mechanical, enforced version of the stratification that concerns me. Emboldened by what could be perceived as a dev nod to elitism, how many players will try to set up a caste system in other content?

I play at odd times, and very often there's only one of [something interesting] starting, if that. Thus far, I do what I must to make my characters absolutely desirable on a team, but as the requirements become more onerous, I definitely will reconsider whether the game is worth that much trouble.

(ed for Sp)

Most of the time, the damage classes are just there to mop up opponents already defeated by crowd control and debuffs.

Yes, I picked up Tornado mainly for AV-busting. In the old days, I used it for crowd control, but massive knockback is heavily frowned on these days, so I've migrated to a more AOE-friendly build. Heck, even I get annoyed when Tornado separates potential targets for Psychic Tornado, or carries them out of the Freezing Rain patch.

I can't spare any slots because most of this build is dedicated to maximizing global recharge. If my math is right, I should have perma-PA with the uncommon Spiritual Boost, and I'm not about to compromise this capability for a bit more damage. My controller is built for crowd control; if I want damage, I grab my blaster, corruptor, or crab.