Lazarillo

Yeah, I'd imagine you can't wait for all that new Mercy Island content, huh?

Oh? I was under the impression that the monthly anniversary date was still unique by player. In that case, yeah, sucks for people on the 14th (or a few days later on, say, the 23rd, like me...).

Well there are a few on other servers too, it looks like, but I'd imagine that since this is a VIP-only head start, they figger, they can do it on the VIP server and everyone will be welcome.

Unless I'm mistaken, it shouldn't make a difference.
Let's say September 14th is your two year anniversary of playing the game. In that case, on the 13th, you'll get:
~7 tokens in compensation for vet rewards.
~1 token for your 1 year anniversary.
Then, the next day, you'll get:
~1 token as your monthly bonus.
~1 token as your yearly bonus.
So you'll have 10 total.

Let's move the anniversary back to the 12th. You'll get:
~8 tokens in compensation for vet rewards.
~2 tokens for your 2 years of bonuses.
And still have 10 total.

I know that feeling, too. But at least there weren't a bunch added, then taken back out, with no indication of why or where (or if) they'll be unlocked somehow, or if they're going to make us pay more on top of already paying for the set to unlock these weapons ala carte or just...what. And even the badge excuse doesn't make much sense, because the one model that would sorta make sense that way, the DUST Cannon (used by enemies who reward a badge), is still enabled by default.

This should be fairly minor overall, but since the look of the set was what made me most psyched about Beam Rifle, this "minor issue" really gets under my skin.

To compensate for the 20% drop in weapon model options?

Why would you waste your time building a second Lore pet?
Granted, if you already have a VR Lore, there's not much reason to be on a BAF anyway, I guess.

BaBs did give a very tongue-in-cheek in-game "explanation", which Garielle related. Something like, "the Crab Spider creation process involves very intrusive surgery, and if you don't want your spine permanently modified like that, maybe you should consider joining the Bane Spiders instead".

I don't think that taking longer to make sure things are right isn't as significant a "failure" as I think you're making it out to be. There are still quite a few little snags, it seems to me, with i21 and Freedom in general, and I'd rather them make sure these are fixed then force it to live to make it seem like they have everything right when they don't, especially given the general lack of stability that we seem to be dealing with lately.

If that means an October release, so be it. There's nothing wrong with delaying a release. How many months was Going Rogue pushed back?

Honestly, even if it does launch on Monday...I wouldn't take the day off solely for that. For a release this major, expect maintenance, whatever day it starts, to last into the late part of the afternoon.

Well, if that were the case, there would be no real need for Cole to argue with Duray, given that he killed him anyway.

Yeah, pretty much. You get to meet a few of them in Maria Jenkins' arc, and they're basically still just the same as they were on Primal. There are a few new types on the new Underground Trial, though, IIRC, but they're mostly just slightly modified versions of the same group.

Expanding on this slightly, it's possible to use Mastermind pets as AE enemies (or at least, it was...not sure if they were removed completely after their XP values were deemed exploitable or if those values were just fixed), so if you were running missions there, you may have seen them as enemies.

For that matter, though, AE enemies can be parts of custom groups with a large variety of names, so that might explain it as well. But there's no default enemy group by that name.

Right, but by definition, if you're that hardcore into Recluse's philosophy, you won't be serving him. On the other hand, if you find Tyrant's more appealing you...might work with him. Or you might decide that he himself is one of those hard sacrifices that needs to be made. However, with Tyrant, at least there's a viable path as to why you'd work for him, other than "he'll beat me up if I don't".



...granted, as he's proven with Apex, Tin Mage, and even Admiral Sutter, he is perfectly willing to beat you up if you don't anyway. But at least the way he's written, there could be more than that (even if the game doesn't allow it in any sort of storyline fashion).

It's not really a matter of who's the more powerful villain or credible threat, though I realize I may have downplayed it. In fact, it's just the opposite in that regard. Like I mentioned in the other post, Recluse is just as capable of wreaking havoc on the people of Earth. In fact, in that regard, he may be a more significant threat, since apparently all of Tyrant's power derives from the Well and is therefore beholden to it, while Recluse has been stated to have other significant methods for causing trouble.

Rather, the point is that as villains go, Tyrant gives characters a reason to serve him. He can appeal to people with similar senses of self-righteousness, or who, to paraphrase a good guy from a certain movie, simply believe that "a person is smart, but people are dumb". Recluse has no higher goal than his own personal grudge and desire to rule. The goal you serve by serving him is "helping Lord Recluse get what he wants". The goal you serve by serving Tyrant is "helping protect humanity from itself".

The difference in goal is an important reason why Tyrant would hold more appeal to people, hence coming back to answer the question of "why are people unhappy about having to serve Recluse, yet those same people are unhappy about not being able to serve Tyrant?"

Right, so the real question is why the double standard? Why is it possible to serve Recluse, but not Tyrant?

And no, it's not "because Tyrant will lay waste Primal Earth if he wins". Recluse will do the exact same thing.

But he aspires to greater. More or less, I can ostensibly see reasons why people would take Tyrant's side (especially, amusingly enough, after the Underground Trial). This is independent of any personal feelings on the matter, so let's not go there (not that you did, but...you people know who you are!). Recluse, on the other hand, I just don't see how working for him appeals to anyone looking to be anything other than an evil lackey.

Tyrant says "Look, we're in a really bad situation, and these are necessary evils. You may not like them, but if we want to protect people, we'll have to carry them out." There's plenty of implication that he actually believes in what he says, though, let's assume he is lying, he's still appealing to some people's senses of righteousness. You might serve him willingly, or be his ally, because you think his goal is in the right place (compare to Vanessa DeVore and Calvin Scott...both want Tyrant gone, so they're willing to work with each other).

Recluse says "Pancake you, I'm Lord Recluse, and since I'm the king, I do what I want. And you do what I want, too." In his case, not only is there no real reason to ally with him, it's literally impossible to do so in the first place. You either serve him, in the pursuit of his own personal goals, or you're against him.

Now, granted, none of this actually really matters, since the plot has already been written into railroading everyone into one single direction. But in terms of why people would have different feelings about being railroaded one way and then the other, I think it basically covers it.

In CoV, you kowtow to a 3rd world despot who can't keep his mancrush under control. In Praetoria, you honorably serve a man trying desperately to keep humanity from wiping itself out.