City of Heroes: Live Forum Archive

Johnny_Butane

Renowned

  • Posts

    2441

  • Joined

  1. Johnny_Butane

    EU Test server

    POST-ACTION

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof_Radburn View Post
    Thanks for pointing me in the right direction,can you tell me were my invite got sent as I havn,t got it lol
    It's possible you got an email informing you about a new patch for Aion and a French Aion player got your invite instead.



    .
  2. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BrandX View Post
    Wanting CoX to be more like a comic book, is not a problem. It's how CoH sold itself.
    It's also how they continue to sell it. See the Prelude to Going Rogue ViDoc.

    The problem is their ad pitch is a half truth.

    The game conforms to MMORPG conventions at the expense of comic book concepts and ideals. It doesn't use MMO funtionality to support the chosen genre, but rather they try to force the ideals of traditional MMORPGs into the genre.

    The result is not "a comic book inserted into a MMO" as they maintain, but a MMORPG with some comic book window dressing.



    .
  3. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Pendix View Post
    Perhapes you didnt' call them "Agro Monkies" But you did characterise people who didnt agree with your stance on tankers as "Broken". Which, pro-tip; is pretty dam insulting.
    Broken like you 'break' a horse? Yep.

    Many people were expressing the sentiment that they wished Tankers were more like they are in comics, but that they didn't expect that to change in this game. They were also unwilling to fight for what they wanted, or work for a better compromise, and so just rolled over and accepted what they got. To me, that's the definition of someone who has been broken.


    .
  4. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PhroX View Post
    I can't make a complete judgement of you, cos I've not seen many of your posts (I tend to stay out of the tanker forum), but this quote hints to me that your problem with the game is mainly that it's a MMO first and a superhero game second. I've noticed Ultimo_ seeming to have a similar attitude in the past (his inability to create a suitable Iron Man clone for example). Not that it's necessarily a bad attitude to have, but it's one that will lead to disappointment...
    That's a fair observation to make.

    I've posted some thoughts on the subject in this thread:

    http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=224134

    Post #57 and later in #73 responding to some things Arcanaville replied with.


    .
  5. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dersk View Post
    Y'know, I almost missed you.
    Almost? Your aim is not nearly that good.



    .
  6. Johnny_Butane
    So, are we in agreement there are a bunch of French Aion players out there with English invites to the Going Rogue beta?





    .
  7. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Reiraku View Post
    Interestingly enough, most of the changes to Invuln were suggested LONG before JB was ever registered to these boards. His proposed change to tanks being "an offensive stance that lets them do the same damage as brutes with 50% fury with 10% more mitigation" never happened.
    If you're referring to me:
    What do suggestions for a power set than spans multiple ATs have to do with suggestions specific for one AT?

    You're confusing two different subjects, both of which I've made many suggestions for.

    Quote:
    Calling Invuln a neglected and ignored set because it wasn't Castle's "pet" (WP) that was inferior in every way didn't bring the buffs about.
    I called Invul neglected because at the time in had been a long time since any changes had been made to it. WP was rappidly becoming the defensive powerset of choice and because of it being newer, enjoyed advantages and improvments to its design the older sets didn't share. There were several player made surveys at the time of people rating the sets by sturdiness and by how "good" they were and WP was at the top and Invul was consistantly at the bottom. I called WP Castle's pet because it clearly was. The first new power set in a long time and it was untouchable for a time.

    Quote:
    Just by saying "it sucks, fix it" doesn't mean he was the reason behind the fix.
    I never made that claim. I said I was very vocal about it the set getting a buff, was flamed for it hard, the set eventually got a buff and now the people who flamed me don't seem to see a problem that it got buffed.

    Quote:
    Before GR was announced, JB would constantly say that switching sides would trivialize tanks since brutes could do more damage and had the same mitigation caps. The wide majority of posts to the contrary said they wouldn't because Brutes, for as neat as they are, still can't tank like tanks can.
    And yet Castle has stated similar reasons being the motivation behind recent buffs to Defenders and Dominators. He's even admitted at the 6th anniversary event that he is concerned about Brutes v. Tankers in GR.

    Concerned enough to do something about it? And to which AT? He didn't say further. I'm interested to see what happens, however.

    Quote:
    Insulting anyone who liked tanks as they were with the phrase "aggro-monkey" didn't help.
    Actually, I used the expression for Tankers themselves, not the people who play them. I think it's a fitting description because they lack the offensive capabilities of their comic counterparts and are relegated to a role of being decoys by running around, grunting with the Taunt power and grabbing aggro. Very much like a rodeo clown instead of a super hero.


    .
  8. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shrikefire View Post
    I actually thought this thread was going to be about the game being boring, which is the issue for me :[ can't wait for GR
    I know you say you're looking forward to GR, but what are you thinking about that would make the game less boring?

    More people online? New content? New power sets?



    .
  9. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ultimo_ View Post
    Say, JB, isn't it fascinating how we're apparently wrong even when we're right?
    I know. I guess if they flip flop and revise history to deny they were ever against a change that went through that everyone loves, they can always be right. I wonder if they also shoot on their own goal and then switch team uniforms?


    .
  10. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Talen Lee View Post
    You paint every person against you as uniform and ignorant
    Nope. I have a fair measure of respect for many of the people who disagree with some of the things I say.

    You're not one of them, however.



    .
  11. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dersk View Post
    Odd. Here I was thinking it was because you repeatedly insisted the developers hated tankers
    If it quacks like a duck. Tankers are still waiting for love and they're last in line.

    Quote:
    tankers were damage-less punching bags and agro monkeys
    Guess that's wrong because everyone knows a Tanker is a "devastating hand to hand combatant, and ranks second only to the Scrapper in sheer melee power" Don't tell Brutes, Stalkers, Blasters and Dominators though.

    Quote:
    invulnerability was weaker to cimerorans than willpower despite being "the" S/L set
    It very much was until it had Defense debuff resistance added to the set.

    Quote:
    The way you say it, it almost sounds like you suggested the changes that happened.
    Lots of people, including myself, had at various time suggested that utility be added to Invul's passives to make them more desirable. I suggested some Fear and/or Confusion resistance put into Tough Hide way back. When Cimerora arrived, I was pushing heavily for Defense Debuff resistance because of the Cimeroran Traitors' defense cascade failures that were thrashing Invuls without capped S/L res.

    I was very skeptical and vocal at the time that Castle would never look at the set and happily he proved me wrong about that not long after. I've complimented and thanked him numerous times for the buff in PMs.


    .
  12. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Talen Lee View Post
    The guy who says 'Power customization should be implemented right now and it isn't complicated or hard to do' is not vindicated when power customization arrives.
    I maintained that power customization was not the impossible task the devs were letting on at the time and that some players were regurgitating as proof that "it would never happen in this game".

    Oh look, it was quite possible.

    Quote:
    Your revisionistic, smug and supercilious attitude is what earns you resentment, and so far no amount of time marching onwards has changed that.
    You of all people have NO business lecturing anyone on smugness, revisionist history and attitude.


    .
  13. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
    Mkay. I think those people were dumb.
    Dumb or not, I was the one getting flamed and trolled, and they continue the hostility to myself and others. And when time marches on and they're wrong, they pull a 180 and claim they never took the opposing stance.

    I got flamed for proposing buffs to Invulnerability. I wasn't the only one suggesting it had problems but I was downright vilified at the time for pushing the issue. Those people may deny it now, but I'm sure Ultimo_ and others remember. And Invulnerability buffs happend, and I even called what they would be the day before the patch notes dropped. When you're repeatedly called names and accused of wanting to destroy the game for suggesting things the devs eventually do and have since proven to improve the game by most people's opinion, you lose all respect for the handful of trolls who have been slinging the muck since day 1.

    Some of them are in this very thread, and IMO the only reason they're still around is because of the mods generous nature in dealing with people who post things much worse than my zealous suggestions.


    .
  14. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
    That's one explanation. Another is that the impending ability to play two different ATs, one of which extremely similar but a better damage dealer might have had something to do with it. It's notable that Defender base damage, +30% damage buff + 95% damage slotting puts a Defender at the same damage as a Corruptor with 95% damage slotting to 3 decimal places, not counting Scourge. Of course, it's only that strong when solo.
    Funny you should bring that up.
    I remember a time before Going Rogue was announced, before the RWZ made co-op a reality. Within my first 10 posts or so, even. I posted that one day there would be side swapping and we'd have Tankers alongside Brutes. I said it was a prime reason why Tankers needed to be reevaluated. I was flamed hard, by many of the people still flaming Ultimo_ and myself, and told that side swapping would "never happen" because it would devastate balance.

    I remember a slightly more recent time when the infamous survey came out and I pointed to that as evidence that side swapping was coming, because I still maintained the position that side swapping was going to be a reality. I was flamed and told that it "prooved nothing" and "even if that ever happens, way in the future, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it." A couple months later, Going Rogue was formally announced. Oh hey, look at that, here comes that bridge now. Mind the sides.



    .
  15. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ignatz View Post
    This is a perfect example of hyperbole. There have been far more threads asking for AT Respecs than problems with endurance over the years.
    Funny you should bring up respecs. I remember a time, when aside from the vet respecs, the only way to respec was to run the trial, and even then you could only do so a certain number of times. When I posted suggesting people should be able to earn infinite respecs on a character, and even be able to save a couple preset builds, some all too familiar faces flamed me that it would destroy the game. Apparently it would cause an epidemic of people respecing before every TF and causing hold ups. This was of course, a few short months before the invention system brought respec recipies to us all, and quite some time before the dual builds feature.


    .
  16. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
    I think this thread is rather firm proof that not everyone hates the mechanic.
    At HeroCon and previous gatherings, when asked about endurance, Fitness or Stamina,the first thing out of Positron's mouth has been, "yeah, we know you guys hate having the take Stamina" and "yeah, we know there's problems with the mechanic".

    Here's a direct quote on the subject of making Stamina inherent:

    Quote:
    We've tried to make Stamina less a required power with a lot of the things IO's do. Any discussion on Stamina generally leads to the elimination of Endurance altogether (because a lot of the reason Staminia is so popular is that is lets you no longer worry about Endurance for the most part). i.e. Making Stamina an inherent means we might as well eliminate Endurance from the game.
    The devs are well aware many people hate the mechanic. Saying "everyone" hates it is hyperbole. "Everyone" hates bee stings but you'll still find some fool who gets off on it. I shouldn't have to explain a figure of speech to you.

    Enough people are still complaining about endurance in the lower levels for this to still be considered something the devs should be looking into. And for the record, I never said the devs weren't, in fact I said quite the opposite earlier in this thread. I see continual signs of them working on the endurance issues, either directly or indirectly, and that fact alone validates that the mechanic is disliked.

    Quote:
    Also, I almost always want the two Fitness prerequisites, and I'm not just pulling your leg. I recently built a Regen Scrapper who I decided to skip Fitness on so I could take a different power pool. A Regen doesn't need Health much, but it regularly bugs me a ton that this Scrapper runs slower than all my other characters.
    Do you mean run as in Sprint or run as in operate?

    Quote:
    On everyone that's not a Regen or something similar, I almost lways want Health - it's a huge boon to survival, especially characters with good +Defense or +Resistance.
    I've always found the in-combat survivability the 40% regen brings to be negligible unless you're stacking regen from IO bonuses. It obviously cuts down on downtime due healing faster between spawns, but unless you're always running in with less than full health, I don't see it as a huge survival boon.

    Quote:
    Nice try, but the difference is that we've all had the game's analogy equivalent of flying around the solar system. We're all coming back and talking about what we saw, and you're part of a small number of people claiming it was totally different than the rest of is.
    Actually, it's closer to going on a class field trip rockhounding and "the rest of you" bringing back quartz and telling the kids who didn't come that you found precious gems while myself and others are trying to get the fee reduced so less fortunate students would be able to join in on the fun in the future.

    Quote:
    Opec has a monopoly to run. What's our excuse? Do you think NCSoft is paying us to disagree with you?
    I think the opposition's motivation is that they've got the game pretty much where they want it and will say anything not to rock the boat. They don't don't want their "accomplishments" to be diminished and let the "nubs" have it easier than they did. They sure don't mind people begging them for build advice, though. If they could, they'd stick a a little veteran pin on their e-peen so everyone would rightfully know to look up to them unquestioningly.

    Quote:
    I'm genuinely interested in what this list of implemented suggestions was.
    I'm genuinely not interested in sharing it with you.

    You've been better than some in this thread, and that's why I'm even responding to you. But you're standing in the same light as some others, both now and in the past, and that's coloring my opinion of you negatively.



    .
  17. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
    I can say with absolute certainty that if you think any of those things is required to be successful or to have fun (or any interrelated combination of the two) then you are "doing it wrong".
    And what is required is just about everyone taking the same power pool with two autopowers they likely don't want to get the one they do? Just to get the game to a point where the mechanic the devs admit everyone hates isn't absolutely crushing their fun any more?

    Quote:
    When large numbers of people come along and point out to you that your position doesn't seem reasonable, or that your experiences don't seem at all common, it seems worthwhile to at least consider that they might be on to something.
    "Everyone knows the universe revolves around the Earth, Johnny_Copernicus!"

    Quote:
    About all I have in common with most of the people on the same general side with me in this thread is that a lot of them are veterans, and apparently most of us are pretty successful at playing the game.
    Right. And OPEC are just a bunch of guys who all like digging holes.


    Quote:
    Hell, I argue a fair bit with some of the folks in this thread. It's not like we're some consistent opinion block come to unify against you.
    I'm not the one who first brought up groupthink in this thread, but they were right on the money.

    Listen, I've danced this dance over many issues. There's been many times now that people were flaming me for suggestions on changing things that the devs later changed, often along the lines as I was advocating. I don't claim I was the motivating factor, but the syndicate of a dozen or so people who always turn out to troll me or Ultimo_ have been off the mark enough to demonstrate that they aren't the final say on game design they think they are.

    For someone who is such an idiot who's ideas would destroy the game, three years later the game is closer to what I've been talking about than ever, and you're still playing it.
    I used to have a laundry list of things I wanted to see changed and improved upon. Thanks to the devs I've been able to strike most of them off. Not as soon as I would have liked, but even I have to admit the future of the game has been brighter this past year and a half. I've still got a couple big ticket items left, but they could end up surprising both of us any day now.



    .
  18. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by New_Dark_Age View Post
    I , however, disagree and think on in the overall bigger picture it is more benefical for EM to have better AOE capabilties on a game with team play.
    I think there's enough sets with AoE as a focus already. I think single target is both more thematic as well as the original and true focus of the set.

    Quote:
    Simply reversing the nerf by giving ET the old animation will do nothing to solve EMs teaming deficiency.
    I'm happy with the new animation. I think however some more damage could be added and distributed between both ET and TF, and perhaps into Bone Smasher. I don't see EM having a teaming deficiency in Brutes, nor in Tankers any more than the stacking and redundancy issue every Tanker has.

    Quote:
    Lets now look at both Blue side Melee ATs. Since Scrappers have an inherent to increase their damage , I feel it is reasonable to think Tankers should have an inherent to increase their durability.
    I don't see how more durability helps Tankers. I play many Tankers, and I've NEVER said to myself, "gee, this mission would go a lot faster if I were more tough".

    Quote:
    Even when not factoring the added imbalance of IOs, Scrappers have High Base damage with Medium Hit points with an inherent that increases damage while Tankers have just Medium Base Damage and High Hit points with no inherent to increase durability. The score is Scrappers 3 , Tankers 2 The logic is undeniable. Tankers should have a better inherent.
    Yes, they should have a better inherent. But Tankers are not lacking defensively. They are lacking in stackability on teams and they are also lacking the soloability of a Scrapper or Brute because of their lower damage, worse endurance efficiency and late blooming.

    I would not vote for any new or changed inherent for Tankers that doesn't increase their damage either directly or indirectly with something like a stacking -Res debuff. It could be similar to the Defender's recent buff in that its strongest when solo and weakens with large teams.


    .
  19. Johnny_Butane
    My thoughts:

    Quote:
    ENERGY MELEE
    Energy Melee currently suffers from dismal AOE performance while no longer having an edge in single target damage since the weakening of Energy Transfer. Other attacks sets can match Energy Melee in single target damage but all have better AOE capabilities. This makes the set without reason to exist as other choices are more logical for overall effectiveness. Despite outcry from the games population, the developers have done nothing to remedy EMs poor condition. The set needs more AOE capabilities , both damage and mitigation. Whirling Hands should be buffed or ET or TF turned into some form of AOE.
    I would personally like to see the set regain it's edge in single target damage, rather than make it another AoE-centric set.

    Quote:
    ENERGY AURA
    The buff to Energy Aura was an insult to my intelligence. Energy Aura needed a Reconstruction like clone or some other unique power to significantly improve its mitigation. What it got was Toxic resistance in one of its passives, a power which was logical to skip, and a weak heal in Energy Drain that requires multiple opponents to become effective , which makes it pathetic against difficult 1 v 1 fights. Again, what good would placing toxic resistance in the auto passive? So now in order to get the toxic resistance players have to invest in a power they previously skipped, thus weakening their build overall. The buff to Energy Aura is undeniable evidence that the Devs are afraid to overpower things through buff so they take inadequate steps to strengthen underperforming sets.
    I don't have any Energy Aura characters, but I'll concede the set still has a bad reputation. At the same time, I've seen some amazing things done with the set. I'll ask you this: rather than increasing the set's survivability, how about increasing its utility and flavour?

    Quote:
    NO REAL TANKER INHERENT
    Disregarding Kheldians and Dominators who’s Domination I view as an overall disadvantage, every single AT on this game, now including Defenders , has a inherent that improves personal survivability. But not tanks. Apparently most people think Tanks don’t need one but with the implementation of IOs , I feel they are wrong. Other than concept, why play a Tanker when you can have a soft capped Scrapper ? There is no logical reason. IOs have now made it possible for Scrappers to achieve high levels of survivability to match Tankers but they have not made it possible for Tankers to achieve Damage that can match Scrappers. What Tankers should have is an inherent , other than the Taunt from Gauntlet needed for teams, that improves their durability. One suggestion I have made is for every attack a tanker makes , he has a chance of landing a Accuracy Debuff and a Damage Debuff in a small AOE around his target. It should be both so it can help both defense and resistance characters equally.
    This was a dead horse long before I took up the cause. I agree with some of your reasoning for them needing an Inherent improvement, but I disagree on your suggestion. At the 6th Anniversary event, Castle admitted he "was concerned" about Tankers vs Brutes with the upcomming side swapping in GR. I plan to sit back and watch if that goes anywhere.

    Quote:
    FIRE AURA
    Fire Aura has been left to rot in inferiority for the last 4 or 5 years. Its condition is so obvious to people with general knowledge of all defensive sets that the situation is unacceptable and shows that the developers are either too afraid of overpowering things through buff, the same as with Energy Aura, or mistakenly think Fire Aura is balanced. Burn has proven to be worthless without an immobile since it scatters mobs and does little damage. Its immobile protection is impractical as well and will just divide a player on when to use it. Imagine having immobile protection in Foot Stoop or Shield Charge. That is how stupid it is.

    Consume is a poor endurance recovery power since it tries to do too many things at once. Its recharge is 3 times that of power sink and requires accuracy slotting because it does damage which means it requires a tohitcheck. So the truth is that by doing damage Consume causes players to do less damage overall since they lack an effective endurance recovery power.

    Fire Aura still to this day continues to have no knockback protections and impractical immobile protection.

    Fire Aura is a set which lies to the player. Conceptually it sacrifices defense for damage, but the only damage buff in FA is Fiery Embrace. Blazing Aura isn’t anything special as other defensive secondarys have damage toggles and Rise of the Phoenix requires a player to die every time to use it. So what we have is a fragile set with little offensive ability to make up for it. Now with the existence of Shields, Fire Aura is obsolete.

    The ways to improve Fire Aura are numerous. I immediately support Burn to me made into an effective attack again while Immobile Protection be placed in Plasma Shield. Consumes recharge should be reduced, it should do no damage and be auto-hit. Fiery Embrace also may need looking into, most notably its recharge. Since the game isnt balanced on IOs either, Fire Aura should have Knock Back Protection since Acrobatics now is too weak.
    I've personally never had issues with Firey Aura. I wouldn't turn down Knock resistance, however.


    .
  20. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MajorPrankster
    You, Johnny_Butane and others that think similarly, want the game to be something it is not.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
    I just want the game to be fun for everyone, not just for min maxers with the "right" power sets/build or power gamers with their own PL cliques and farm fresh IOs.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MajorPrankster
    I abhor that point of view and those sorts of arguments bore me.
    I see.


    .
  21. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lightslinger View Post
    Knowing my luck there were probably 2 buttons side by side on some NCSoft employee's computer screen

    "Send Lightslinger GR Beta Invite" or "Send Lightslinger Fancy French Aion Newsletter"

    I got one as well, and I will trade it for GR Beta access and a cookie.


    .
  22. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ultimo_ View Post
    The lesson I take from all this is that if anyone other than that particular little clique has the audacity to post anything like a suggestion, that they will circle the wagons and make (often very) personal attacks until the thread's purpose is lost under a pile of ****.
    Hey now. All of their posts are doubleplusgood!


    .
  23. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BrandX View Post
    It's not that you have to have Stamina. It's that everyone wants to play non-stop.
    Right. And the devs are not in the business of giving everyone what they want. Just because everyone hates stopping, downtime and sucking wind is no reason to try and change it.

    Quote:
    Personally, I see it as fitting my concepts. They're heroes/villains who do lots of activity. They're fit.
    Right. If they were unfit, they woundn't be super heroes. Makes perfect sense then that our heroes are inherently unfit and gasping for breath unless we take a power pool that specifically says they're not.

    Quote:
    I had a DM/Regen scrapper doing just fine without Stamina.
    *snip*
    In that case...make a Regen. Grab some IOs.
    Build an Electric Armor or a Kin...so many ways to do it.
    Yes, Ultimo_, stop being an idiot and pick the correct power sets from now on. Do as you're commanded. It's not the devs fault the power sets you want to play are bad. It's perfectly fair for some power sets to have advantages that everyone wants, like a recovery boost, while having disadvantages nobody minds or notices. And it's also perfectly fair other power sets to have advantages nobody really needs and crippling disadvantages that make the game unfun. And if your concept happens to call for one of the latter power sets, I guess your concept is wrong and you're an idiot for wanting it.

    The lesson you should take away from this is do what everyone else tells you, build how they dictate with the power sets they choose for you and stop expecting to have fun if you do otherwise.


    .
  24. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow View Post
    Yikes! Man, now I kind of feel bad for the guy. But at the same time, that's a pretty serious gaff when you launch a story that contradicts your own lore and players have to keep pointing out the plot holes. Jack used to beat us over the head with this mythical story bible, which apparently was big enough for him to hide behind when the Council car wreck was dumped into the game, and boy were THOSE fun times! The Independence Port Security Chief briefing still has Atlas fighting an "alien armada" because game lore suddenly became phobic of the 5th Column and nazism, replacing them with the Council and fascism. I don't know why that was, but it ended up laying so many eggs we're STILL not done counting our chickens before they hatch, and I promise to stop saying stupid things!

    But, yeah, the Khan TF is just... Awkward. I don't know if the actual writing for it is any good (I assume it is), since my team didn't exactly let me experience it, but the story as best I could piece it together seemed... Well, yeah, seemed like it was written by someone who didn't know the first thing about City of Heroes lore. And I'm not talking about getting character nuances wrong that we, the players, might have memorised after five years. I mean obvious mistakes that anyone who'd played the game from 1-50 ought to have at least seen mention of. My God! Akharist as the Citcle representative? Holy cow!

    That's actually something that bugs me a lot about new content being added to the game when there's old content it references. When the Rikti War Zone was added, that basically invalidated Angus McQueen almost entirely. His story arc no longer makes sense. When the Statesman TF was added, this invalidated Maria Jenkins' story arc entirely, because it relies on the Statesman missing, which he clearly isn't. Adding the Midnight club didn't invalidate much, but the game is still filled with little references to people coping with the Midnight Club being gone, and it's not!

    I dare say the best stories are those who introduce an entirely new zone with entirely unrelated plot points, like Coratoa or Faultline. And even THEN they managed to dump all over the Trolls and the Outcasts with the Hollows, putting their leaders 2-3 level ranged before the factions stop showing up, and don't even get me started on Striga and the Council/Column car wreck!

    I'm actually reminded of Linkara's review of Donna Troy's backstory, from her accidental creation to the many revisions she's gone through, all for the sake of making sense and, according to him, all making less and less sense. That's kind of how I feel about the Khan TF. It sounds like it started out as just gigantic misunderstanding by an author who may have otherwise made a good story, but one which had nothing to do with the game, which was then crowbarred into in-game lore a little at a time until it at least stopped falling off, but it still bears the trace of "whatthehellary."

    Seriously, I sincerely hope that the storyline in Going Rogue is more concise and the people writing it talk to each other more. Hopefully avoid goofs like this in the future.

    I felt sorry for the guy too. You know it's a bad scene when I'm the one talking other people down from attacking the devs. I went into the TF with the understanding it was the guy's first shot at TF design. I was willing to let the lore gaffs slide, provided they were corrected with further revisions to the TF. Those revisions never really came and the TF is now what it is.

    But at this point, the TF isn't being shunned because of the story, but because of the final encounter. I don't expect it to get fixed any time soon, even if the devs had the time. Right now it's radioactive and neither the players or the devs feel like going near it until it has a cooldown period.

    Eventually I think it should get a Positron TF-style reworking. It's an important story point, I think? No way to tell how it plays into the Coming Storm, because that's an even bigger narrative mess IMO.

    But story-wise, I can't see any of the factions that are on the same level as the 5th Column cooperating with Reichsman. They've got nothing to gain. I could only see it being appealing to the lower tier gangs because they want to move up. The Outcasts, the Skulls, Hellions, the Warriors, yeah I could see them at least coming to parlay.

    I would totally want to see Reichsman take the now directionless Outcasts and shape them into a highly trained and dangerous elemental powered 5th Column division.


    .
  25. Johnny_Butane
    Quote:
    and it may be some of the most challenging content you’ve ever experienced.
    Yeah, they keep saying that, and every time it makes me cringe.

    To the devs, Reichsman is "challenging content".
    To me it's a 30 minutes drawn out cycling of my attack chain over and over while getting my mez protection crapped on.

    To the devs, the STF if "challenging content."
    To me it's Statesman sitting alone on his little boat because the vast majority of players tried it once and didn't want to bother with it again.

    To the devs, the Shadow Shard TFs are "challenging content".
    Yeah.

    I think the challenge will be keeping most people from rage quitting because their character isn't good enough even on the lowest difficulty setting, their teams lacks the magic powerset needed or they can't guess the number between 1 and 1000 that Castle was thinking of when he designed an encounter.



    .