Lionors

I'll resurrect the dead thread for something I didn't see mentioned.

A friend today took us to a mailbox in RWZ that has a message if you click on it. Location is:
774.8 42.0 120.2.

Very neat!

~Elizabeth

Nor had I ever had any problems with drone until the last month or so. However, the problem was so pronounced as to make soloing very difficult on indoor instanced missions. I mean, imagine that you summon your drone and it just floats around in staggery circles, not attacking and not following you. Talk about a PITA. If my drone's working properly, it may take a moment or two to follow, but it'll zoom along pretty quickly. It might get distracted by a mob, but it will show up eventually, if it doesn't self-destruct first.

Basically, the bug is that the drone settings can be changed using the 'all pets' button on the lore pet interface, which, to the best of my knowledge, should not happen. Moreover, once they're changed, the drone is stuck in that setting unless and until you change the stance/setting back using the lore pet interface.

As best as I can figure, this is how it happens. When you summon your lore pets, the drone window combines with the lore pet window. [Edit: I thought the drone window stayed separate if you summoned it first, but it doesn't. Shows you how often I use my lore pets.] If you make any changes to stance or position using the 'all pets' button at the top of the interface, the drone settings will be changed as well. Therefore, if you tell the pets to 'stay', using the 'all pets' button, the drone is set to stay as well.

Let's say that you just summon your drone after that, and you don't summon your lore pets. There's no way to change the drone's settings using its normal interface. As you know, all you can do with the regular drone interface is dismiss the pet. So, you're stuck with a drone set to stay, set to passive, or what have you. My guess is that the drone continued to follow and attack in outdoor settings because MM pets end up following you anyway outdoors, at least once you get a certain distance away from them.

So. All I'm saying is: If you suddenly notice your drone won't follow you on an indoor map and/or isn't attacking, the problem is likely that you've accidentally changed its stance with your lore pets interface. To correct the problem, 1. summon your lore pets as well as your drone, so the drone appears on the lore pet interface window, 2. using the all pets button, change the stance back to 'aggressive' and 'follow me'. The problem should be solved.

Granted, it's still a bug, because the drone shouldn't respond to the lore pet interface at all, but it seems to be doing so. But in lieu of a bug fix, this at least addresses the issue. I'm sharing this because support didn't know about either the bug or how to fix it, so I'm hoping this will help if anyone else runs into the same problem I did. Better yet, IMO, I would just avoid using the 'all pets' button on the lore interface.

~Elizabeth

I recently experienced a problem with my level 50 AR/DEV's gun drone. When summoned, the drone is supposed to follow and attack, like a troller pet. However, on indoor maps, the drone would not follow. Instead, it would simply hover in circles. Dismissing and resummoning did no good. However, it worked fine on outdoor maps.

A friend suggested that the drone acted like a minion stuck on 'heel'. However, the pet interface for the drone is like the ones for troller pets, not like the one for minions. You can't change the stance or positioning, only dismiss the pet. Technically speaking, there should be no way for the drone to get stuck in that position.

At my friend's suggestion, I tried summoning my lore pets first, then my gun drone. I don't use the lore pets that often, and when I do, the gun drone is almost always summoned. Under normal circumstances, I end up with two separate pet windows, one for the gun drone, and one for the lore pet. However, I found that if I summoned the lore pets *first*, the gun drone window combined with the lore pet window. While the gun drone did not have position/stance buttons of its own, it WAS under the 'all pets' position stance buttons.

I reset 'all pets' to 'follow', then dismissed the pets. When I resummoned, the drone worked just as it should.

Therefore, what's happening is that the drone is a pet, not a minion, but it can get combined with the lore minion interface. Once the setting for 'all pets' is changed (say to defensive rather than aggressive or stay rather than follow), the drone gets stuck, and of course, there's no way to change the stance or setting through the usual pet interface.

No idea if any of the troller pets have had this problem, or if it's unique to just the drones, but support didn't know of it, so I thought I'd share.

~Elizabeth

Not so much a costume bug fix (although I've got several, most have been mentioned) as two requests.

1. Jay's costume request thread was shut down back in February. The last redname post said another would be created, but I'm not seeing one, unless it's elsewhere. So, could we please have that back?

2. Please. I beg you. Could the costume designers PLEASE design some new female costumes which are 1. flattering to female figures 2. aren't boring neck-to-toe same old, same old takeoffs on existing tights designs and 3. are ones that classic superheroines would actually wear? It wouldn't take much. If someone would take the time to add some retextured tops and bottoms with skin designs, like the Angelic Plus and Hearts Plus, for example, that would breathe some much needed life into that area of the costume creator, and it wouldn't even require a new design, just some embellishment.

Barbarian, gunslinger and steampunk are all great -- but again, not a classic superhero look. I've been able to pick some bits and pieces out of the other packages, but I haven't bothered buying either the mecha or the retro package, and I won't. Celestial armor and fire and ice were the last two I'm getting sucked into buying unless I see some decent female costuming which isn't something bland and forgettable.

FYI, I don't hold you guys responsible for the utter dorkiness of the retro sci fi package.

~Elizabeth

I know this reply is somewhat late, but I think you'll like munitions. It's very synergistic with the AR/DEV. Body armor is a nice addition, and does *not* have the additional graphics which drive me nuts with most shields -- plus, it's always on and doesn't detoggle. However, IIRC, you can't use LoTG in there, since it's a defense set. I ended up using pieces of the PvP Gladiator's Armor with the across the board defense unique. Works just as well in PvE, for my purposes. Cryo hold is my utter favorite of the set. Surveillance is not bad as a debuffing power; I just need to remember to use it. I used to use LRM much more than I do now that I have Judgement; I may, however, spec out of it and pick up another power altogether.

Hope that helps. Can't help you on which patron pool would help, although I'd think Mace Mastery would be pretty good. You wouldn't need web envelope, but the cocoon would be a hold, and I'm always in favor of pets, just, well, because.

~Elizabeth

I'll give some love to AR/DEV/Munitions!

My main is one and I've loved her for years. You have to be willing to *not* be a blapper, though, so if your playstyle includes playing up close and personal, it's not for you. AR/DEV works best from a distance, and even better if you add flight - you can get in some killer cones with relatively minimal knockback and good control. Add your gun drone (or two overlapping ones, if your recharge is fast enough) and you can lay some serious (and surgically precise) waste if you're slotted right. You do have to develop more of a 3D playstyle, but that's not a problem for me.

The cryo hold in Munitions is terrific. Combine the web grenade with your cryo hold in your cycle, and you do a pretty good job of slowing and/or holding the worst offenders. What I'm not using as much as I used to is the LRM. Body armor is definitely nice, too.

I'm still ticked about the messed up gun drone, but otherwise, the changes to it over the years have been awesome. Following drones that summon in air = made of win. And they take some aggro for you, too.

But understand, I am a cautious player, and I may also be one of the ONLY blasters in the game who did *not* get her top level debt badge before level 50. The farther-back style suits me because I can deal damage longer with less penalty. If I'm going to the hospital every 5 minutes because my powers draw in a lot of unwanted aggro and/or I have to blap, then even if my damage is *potentially* greater, I'm not taking advantage of it!

I'll also second ice/ice/cold -- I've not done nearly as much with mine as I would have liked to, but I've enjoyed her very much. Very blasterollery.

~Elizabeth

I think most of it depends on your playstyle and how you usually play. I've never been a toebomber, so never had any use for either trip mines or time bombs. I also generally duo with my blaster, not solo, so risking my neck to set up a time bomb makes no sense when I can just send my hubby's meatshield tanker to go take my aggro while I riddle everything with bullets.

Even trip mines were better than the time bombs. Either way, though, I respec'ed out of both and took gun drone -- which, until the devs messed with it this last time, was fantastic.

But just my two cents and what works for me.

~Elizabeth

I'm right there with you, Phineas. I've bugged this several times now and did one live report the first time I noticed it. This has been going on for THREE MONTHS now. What gives? I wasn't having any problem summoning drones in the air, either.

What I'm noticing is that the only time the drones work as they're supposed to is out of doors. Inside instanced missions, however, the drones don't follow AT ALL, and rarely attack when I summon them in mob range. Mostly, they aimlessly float in a circle and do nothing.

Also, if I do summon one right on top of a mob, if it's in an area with multiple levels, the drone will fly up and start randomly attacking an upstairs mob. Once in a while, one will shake free and zoom after me, but if it does, it doesn't attack a mob, and it destructs shortly thereafter.

Lloyd's response to my initial report was to dismiss and resummon the drone, but, hello? It recharges quickly, but not so quickly I can possibly summon it for each and every mob. And yes, the lack of following is THAT bad. Today, we were running Night Ward missions. I made the mistake of summoning a drone at the entrance of one of the larger rooms. It stayed there in the doorway the entire time we took down the mob, and yet it was just barely out of strike range. Arrrgggh!

This is a T-9 power, devs! Please, when will this be fixed? It's as bad as a troller's T-9 pet failing to work -- worse, because we have no way of holding and/or debuffing what's attacking us. This is making my main unsoloable except on the utter weakest of settings (and even that's a struggle) and a definite weak sister on teams where once, she was good muscle. Not only that, but I'm getting clobbered far more often, even though I stay back, because the drones used to act as an additional buffer for attacks.

Please, I beg you, give us back our working drones ASAP!

~Elizabeth

I'm glad for the option of examining the packages through the character creator before I buy, so thanks. Granted, it'll probably mean I buy *less*, but I'll be happier with what I get.

All that said...I'm not buying this package, at least, not as it stands.

Keep in mind, I play no male characters, so I didn't look at any of the male costume parts.

There's one thing which would absolutely have made me bought this package, and that would be the inclusion of a skin top and bottom. The silver pattern is lovely, but I don't like the baggy look. A cutout where that funky diamond is on the chest would have improved the looks immensely, and something more form-fitting would actually look like *armor*.

Although I don't ever do helmets, these were attractive, but too large for female characters, or at least mine.

Also? Not buying any of the belts or the hip guards. Though the pattern is very pretty, and I'm sure it works for male characters, it makes the female character's butt look like one of those trucks with the wide wheel wells. A trimmer belt with more elaboration would be much prettier and not look so horribly bulky. Not even saying eliminate what you've got, because I'm sure there's someone out there who doesn't have the objection to it that I do, but having an additional option that's more streamlined, yet still had the elaborate silver look, would be terrific.

Finally -- and I have no idea where to make this suggestion -- is there any chance that we could have a package that reworked some of the tops/bottoms with skin options and added textures to them, as was done with Angelic Plus and Excess Plus, for example? Most of what we're getting in the female costume packages anymore are dress clothes or semi-armor that's not very feminine or attractive on female characters. When it comes to something my female characters would actually wear out to fight, I'm still stuck with stuff that was introduced years ago.

If you guys texturized some of the skin options, I would be on it in a heartbeat. That would look superhero-ey, and still be attractive.

Thanks much!

~Elizabeth

I have no idea if this is the correct thread to provide feedback for the designers, but here goes my input as far as the costumes for the female characters are concerned: [EDIT: Please note, my comments apply only to female characters; I don't play male or huge ones, so I didn't test those.]

1. Metallic top is good. I think the cut of the tank top option looks a little better around the chest than the metallic top does, no matter where the slider's set -- the edge of the top's more clearly defined -- but I like the back lacing and the straps. However, the metallic top does not appear as an underlayer when you select the jacket option, and I'd love to see that.

2. Skirt's good, too.

3. Love the boots -- with one exception. Can we get a leather setting as well as a metallic setting? These would go GREAT with the Excess Plus pattern if they were just leather instead of metallic.

4. Belt - terrific.

5. Hair - Cute.

6. Sunglasses - Also a like; been wanting something like that for a while.

7. Casual dress shirt - STINKS. The problem with several of the so-called unisex pieces which have been introduced recently is that while they're clearly designed to look good on male and huge characters, they do NOT look good on female characters, no matter what the character build or where the sliders are set. (The additional chest details for Celestial Armor are a classic example, which is a shame, because it's gorgeous on male characters.)
This shirt just makes the whole female torso look like a block sitting on top of skinny little legs. It would look really good if it were just designed to fit a female body, i.e., typically smaller waist. Too bad, too, because I liked the tie that went with it and it would have made a great sailor-type outfit otherwise. Completely not worth purchasing for female characters as it stands.

8. Quilted jacket - Will be excellent for a ski or winter themed outfit, so glad for that!

9. Acid washed jeans - I like the design and acid wash, but was very disappointed to see that somehow, the pants make the character's butt look flat. As in, it looks *really* weird flat, especially when viewed from the side. Again, doesn't matter where you set the slider, because I played with that, too, to see if either general physique or hips made a difference, and it didn't. None of the other pants options seem to have this problem, either, so can it be fixed? I'm guessing this is another option which was not originally designed for female characters, and sadly, it shows.

Thanks!

~Elizabeth

I managed to get the six names of most of the characters I thought I'd transfer/play, plus my first 50.

The two exceptions were Gyrfalcon or Chiaroscuro, both of which I'd wanted so I could transfer characters. I'll just keep playing them on their home servers.

Met my better half in the Red Dragon Inn on AOL in 1996 when we were guildmasters of allied groups working on a combined project. We got married in 1997, went through several different MUDs, MMOs and games, and had our baby in 2009.

So far, it's been wonderful.

From what I've seen, I think gamers probably have a slightly better chance than people who are in a generic chat room looking for partners. That said, a LOT depends on the people in question. How much do the people have in common outside of the game they play? How mature and responsible are they? Are they steady enough to have a real job, or are they crashing on couches?

I think it made a huge difference that neither of us was *looking* for a relationship. We both had real lives outside of the game. We were friends gaming together before anything else happened, and even when we did get together, we were very careful. We both checked each other out to make sure we each were who we said we were. I did end up moving, but I did so because I was able to get a MUCH better job and a better place to live. I didn't move *only* to be with him (thereby making myself dependent upon him), nor did I move in with him when I arrived (which, IMO, is a kiss of death for any virtual-turned-real relationship.) However, he WAS a huge help in helping me find a place to stay and get the necessary transfer stuff going (meeting with the phone guys so I could have a phone when I arrived, giving me the scoop on which apartment complexes were the best in the area, etc.), plus he helped me with the actual moving and settle into the area. So, when I did arrive, I had a place of my own to live and a job waiting. Because of that, I knew that if we didn't work out, I'd still have that security.

Both of us knew far too many people who fell hard for the virtual person, sold off everything, quit the job and moved across country only to find that the actual person wasn't at all what they'd expected. In some cases, husbands, wives and kids were left, too. We also knew a few others who made a career of 'falling in love' so they could squat on a couch and avoid a real job. I had a friend who really got taken by a guy like that, and I'm not sure she's ever really recovered. We were both very anxious for that not to happen to us.

However, we also know two other couples who met around the same time we did, in the same venue, who are still together. One couple is married and the other are long term partners. So it can happen, but I'd never recommend *intending* to use a game as a way to meet eligible men/women.

Congrats (apparently rather after the fact) to the happy couple!

PvP. I've enjoyed it in other games, but NOT here. For one, I get bored. VERY bored. I've been known to throw friendly Arena matches just because I am done, already, and want to go on to something else. I also think I have a snert-magnet that activates every time I set foot into a PvP zone. And it doesn't help that I pick AT/powersets that I like which are effective in PvE...which doesn't necessarily translate into 'effective in PvP'. Which just makes me feel horrible about characters I love.

And snerts, period.

Oh, and players who claim women don't play CoX (or, in fact, game.) I've actually had people *insist* I'm not female, possibly because my character wasn't wearing an armored burqua at the time. (The worst insister was with a character who was covered neck to toe. You got me on that one.) The better half finds it pretty funny, though. And as a very understanding co-gamer wife, I really hate the term 'wife aggro'. When the reason the wife is 'aggroing' gets mentioned, it almost always seems pretty reasonable to me -- and makes me *very* thankful for a husband who helps with the chores and the baby so *I* can play, too.

Aaah, I feel much better now.

~Elizabeth

Count me in as well. Although, I don't even get a DB message. My screen just freezes when I select a character. I've only gotten to try Pinnacle so far. When I try to log in again, I get the message 'this account is already logged in'.

Oi.

~Elizabeth

Color me really disappointed this year.

My husband and I play together. We have a 10 month old daughter. We haven't been playing much of late because we prefer to play together, and unfortunately, life with baby is such that this isn't possible without a great deal of effort. Usually, one of us is minding her while the other does whatever needs to be done. Mind you, I'm not complaining, because she's a lot more fun than the game.

However, since it was the WL event and there was a new badge, and she actually took a nap when we were both awake (!) we decided to take advantage of our free hour together and try for the WL badge with our two mains. They'd been at the first winter event, and for sentimentality's sake, we generally try to get them in at the seasonal events.

Keep in mind, we've been organizing events for years. However, not only was this one like pulling teeth, it really wasn't any fun. It was just a grind -- and a grind made all the worse by the fact that after spending almost an hour getting packages, taking down the monster, and trying to get together multiple teams with debuffers...we ended up taking the guardian down twice and getting the WL halfway.

No badge. Nothing to show for the time we spent. If I were still able to spend 12 hours on a Saturday or Sunday parked in a chair at my computer, that would have been only a minor irritation. However, given that just an hour comes with great effort, it was really, really annoying to feel I'd wasted that time. We really felt we would have enjoyed it more if we'd just headed off to spend time together or even watch something we'd recorded on the DVR. That's really sad, given that I've really been looking forward to getting to play.

I don't mind events where I can get an eight team of supergroup members and friends to tackle something. I really mind events when I have to basically run a raid in order to get a single badge. I don't play WoW because I can't stand raids, and I really hate having to participate in one in CoX now for one badge.

I don't expect things to be easy. However, I really dislike events which are set up to be defeated by circumstances I cannot control. I cannot control when I get a chance to play any more, nor how long I can play. I cannot control server population, and trust me, Liberty's been a ghost town when I've been around. I don't want to transfer to another server, especially not Freedom or Virtue, and besides, my main's got a prestige record I don't want to lose.

Could the designer of this event never, EVER set anything like this up again? It's bad enough to have to make sure you have a debuffer on hand; it's just insane to have to make sure you have twenty something people in order to get one single event badge. Please, *please* design events so that even people like me, who are paying my full subscription every month for one or two hours of play, can accomplish a simple badge at a seasonal event without having to get a babysitter to look after my daughter to do it.

While I mostly lurk and rarely have the time or inclination to hop in on threads, I wanted to contribute to this one because, with all due respect, I think you're giving absolutely the wrong advice on what to do with the CoW arcs. I was one of those who provided critiques for CoW as it was being written and rewritten, and if I had a nickel for every time I helped playtest it, I'd at least be able to buy a Coke somewhere. I'm speaking up because I really DON'T want the writer to do what you've recommended.

First, there's one big thing to keep in mind which I think affects perception of any arc. I skimmed through your other reviews and noticed that you tend to play with villains. CoW I and II are heroic arcs. That you choose to play heroic arcs with villains tells me that you probably prefer playing villains to heroes. Nothing wrong with that, but I do notice a different mindset in those people who prefer villains to heroes.

Players who prefer to play heroes are satisfied with feeling their characters have been heroic in a story. Players who prefer to play villains want their characters to be the center of the story. While there's nothing wrong with either preference, the fact is, that preference will in turn affect the type of arcs that people like to play.

Being heroic isn't about winning medals. True heroism (and I admit, the term 'hero' has been so abused in latter years that it's become almost meaningless) means taking action not because you're going to get a medal, or because the world is watching, or because the person you're helping is important enough in your eyes to warrant your intervention. Being heroic means acting to help someone regardless of the cost to yourself, regardless of whether you'll ever be recognized for your actions, whether or not the person is important or beautiful or wealthy or powerful. The only true reward you can count on is a sense of satisfaction from a job well done, and you might not live long enough to even enjoy that.

If what you prefer is to have your character be the main focus of the story, an arc like this will not appeal because it's not a 'your character saves the world/destroys the world' premise. Your character isn't going to be motivated to act unless s/he is going to receive adulation, get to rub shoulders with the bigwigs, get the ladies (or gentlemen), get a promotion, etc.

Again, there's nothing wrong with either preference, but it will affect the type of arc one prefers.

CoW isn't for the faint of ego. It really isn't for those who have to be the epicenter of events in a story. It can't be. You're reliving the past, not rewriting it. When you watch films about the Titanic, you know it's going to sink. When you watch the Zapruder film, Kennedy gets shot. And in the base attacks and the aftermath, a whole bunch of heroes died.

You suggest:

My votes are as follows:

TO Level:

#1: 15+ Minute Tutorial - Knowledge is Power: Architect Entertainment #28470
#2: Day Job Hell: A Villain's First Day Job #322480

DO Level:

#1: Ctrl+Alt+Reset #137561
#2: The Invasion of the Bikini-Clad Samurai Vampiresses from Outer Space #61013

SO Level:

#1: Teen Phalanx Forever #67335
#2: Polar Emergence Neutral Government User Interface Network (PENGUIN) #29205

Epic:

#1 A Warrior's Journey: The Flower Knight Task Force #260284
#2 The Fracturing of Time #171031

Short:

#1 Forget the Rose, Send Me the Thorns #8925
#2 Celebrity Kidnapping #1388

Multi:

#1 The Consequences of War Part 1 and Part 2 #227331 and #241496
#2 The Audition Part 1 and Part 2 #221240 and #221241

Comedy:

#1 Captain Dynamic, the Great, Faces the Great Face #190069

Haven't gotten to the rest yet - will update if I can.

Thanks to Bubbawheat for putting this together!

I'd like to nominate the following two arcs:

Consequences of War Part I - @dalghryn - 227331
Consequences of War Part II - @dalghryn - 241496

Heck, as much as I gas on, I'm impressed you read it!

Hope it was somewhat helpful. I really wanted to get back with ASAP, since you'd been nice enough to tender a review yourself, but ASAP + occasionally crying baby = not always my best work.

[ QUOTE ]
Now that's something. I thought I had stated explicitly that they were in fact undead. I'll have to look through and see if that's something that needs to be fixed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually think you *may* later on down the road, or there's that inference, but IIRC, it wasn't in the initial screen, which may be the point where a dedicated heroic character makes a choice about whether or not to continue. I can make the other half re-run it with me and take a look if you need a double check.

[ QUOTE ]
I thought about that when writing it, and have been told similar things by other people who ran through it. All in all, I've decided to leave it. Ashton's stone cold stupid, and probably doesn't even realize that bro is not a proper term for a woman. Personally, I think it's just another level of potential humor.

As an aside, one of the specific instances where someone pointed out things like that, is when one of my friends went through the sequel. His character was a female, and one of Ashton's lines in the sequel is "You're just jealous of all the chicks I'm going to score with this new body!" My response to him was "Ashton's experience with women consists of drunken sorority girls, so he assumes they all love to make out with each other."

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually think it's one of those things that will flick more on female gamers playing females than about anything else, which is why I brought it up -- didn't want you to be broadsided. A male playing a female character isn't going to really be affected similarly; after all, he *is* a 'bro'!

I *still* want to make the arc where the buff contact refers to all the players as 'girl', 'honey' and 'sweetheart', darn it.

I hate to admit it, but I ain't a console girl anymore, so I have no knowledge of Castlevania to put the humor in context. I *have* had more contact with the goth set than I think Dalghryn has, so I took it as a parody of that and enjoyed it for that reason.

And as for Ashton...I have no clue if this is intended, but I got the mental image of Ashton Kutcher as a vampire...which was a good giggle in and of itself. Made me think of whatever comic was griping about miscast parts and, in particular, the mere idea that Keanu Reeves could ever be considered as a Dracula. "So what would he say? [nasal clueless Bill & Ted Keanu voice] I am Keanuuuu Dracula!" [/end nasal clueless Bill & Ted Keanu voice]

Humor is a weird animal, though, and really, you just can't satisfy everyone. For example: A couple of years ago, one of the authors in my crit circle was writing for a line which folded. She had one more book on her contract, and it was suggested she write a romantic comedy, which she'd never done before.

So she tries. Keep in mind, she's sold several things and she's quite a good technical writer. However, nobody, but *nobody*, could give her consistent advice on how to make the humor element work.

As an experiment, we each wrote down four comedy movies which we felt to be surefire wins, and traded lists. Took us a couple of months, but everyone finally watched the movies.

The result? Of my movie list, one person liked all of my movies, two people thought I was even more twisted and geeky than they knew me to be, and the fourth flatly told me I'd wasted eight hours of her life. (But she said she still loved me. In a non-sexually-curious-drunken-sorority-girl way, of course.)

Some of humor is understanding the frame of reference, especially if it's parody or satire. (I'm on a kick about that today, for some reason...) Take Mystery Men, for example, which was the movie on my list that my fourth crit partner told me she loathed the absolute most.

I play a game about comic book heroes and I'm a comic book collector enabler, so I got most of the jokes. If I didn't get the jokes about the characters, my comic book collector was there to explain them to me. She, on the other hand, doesn't have that reference, so everything sailed right over her head and splatted on the wall. (So, I think, did the DVD; it had some suspicious dents on the case.)

So, if the humor elements aren't coming through, it may just be that people aren't familiar with what's being parodied, and there's not a thing you can do about that, unfortunately.

I am going to get him to run the sequels with me, though, and will give a yell if you're still looking for feedback.

~Elizabeth

P.S. Was an occasionally drunken sorority girl, but everyone I knew was into getting that MRS degree...

For the record: I may be Dalghryn’s wife, but he will be the first to tell you that I am also his most stringent (and persistent) critic.

I state my role because I want it understood that marriage or not, I’m anything but his sycophant. (He’ll be the first to tell you that, too, if I haven’t beaten him to the punch. I didn’t lose my own mind and opinions when I got married, thankyouverymuch, and I also have no trouble asserting them, also thankyouverymuch.)

That said, I did read the comments by the player review by Infantum which Dalghryn referenced in his previous post and which I’ll link to here: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showflat....art=34&vc=1

Before I say anything else, I’ll say that I, as a player, always appreciate reviews which give me good reasons for why arcs were liked or were not liked, and I sincerely appreciated the time taken to play and comment upon the arc. Beats the heck out of no feedback at all. A review does not help me if I can’t understand *why* a reviewer arrives at his or her conclusions. I don’t have to agree with a reviewer and I don’t expect to (after all, if we all liked the same stuff, there’d be two books in the world and one play written by Aristophanes) but I do need to know if we look for the same things.

Frankly, I don’t think we do look for the same things, Infantum; I get the feeling you probably prefer villainous arcs to heroic and possibly go for anti-heroes, which I don’t. Unconventional heroes, fine; anti-heroes, no. Again, nothing wrong with that preference, but not my cuppa.

One other thing I wondered was whether you were aware of the historical incident which is intended to be illustrated, which is the Rikti attack upon superheroes and bases in which so many heroes died. I get the feeling you may not be aware of that incident, and that may be part of the problem as well. Not something that a writer can do anything about, however, so we’ll set that aside, too. Sometimes, you’re damned if you do stick with history and damned if you don’t.

I’m just going to pull the ‘issues’ section out of that review and take the points out of order, just for ease of handling, not to try to take anything out of context or misconstrue it.

[ QUOTE ]
The player isn't that important. This might be mitigated just by cutting down the plethora of cameos, but even some of the mission objectives feel weak by themselves. In particular the milk run (which the contact tries to assure you is more than milk run) feels very weak both from its initial presentation and from the fact you could probably just sit at the entrance and wait for the vanguard to kill everything. A less bad [censored] group would help here, or perhaps just lots of optional body bags and very few survivors.

[/ QUOTE ]

SPOILER:

Er, I have to ask: Did you guys run the last mission? If there were any more body bags, Dow Chemical couldn’t keep up with the plastics demand.

END SPOILER

Actually, I’m only guessing what you mean by ‘milk run’, as you don’t reference the specific mission, but if it’s the one with Brinell in it, I’ve asked about cutting back the number of Vanguard, too. I think it’s down to the bare minims as it is, but I could be wrong. This may simply be a case where you run into MA limitations.

The reason for the ‘milk run’, by the way, becomes very important in the second arc. For one, it was pointed out to you in the entry popup that it’s kind of strange that such a secret and supposedly well-guarded facility was attacked. (Read: red flag, and you need it for the second arc, which you didn’t run.) It’s also needed as a way to work around canon. According to canon and history, the first ‘official’ translator for the Rikti wasn’t available until *after* the first war. Therefore, it’s important to note (and believe me, when you write an arc, you’ll find people *will* hold you to it) that what you’ve got is a prototype translator and how you got it.

Again, it's another 'damned if' situation.

I’ll get to the ‘why the player isn’t important’ issue later on, but in essence, this wasn’t meant to be an arc where your character is grand, glorious and saves the day. It’s intended as an illustrative piece to put a history incident in perspective.

[ QUOTE ]
Far too many meaningless named characters. The amount of cameos in this arc both left precious little spotlight for the player as well as making none of them memorable in the process. I'd cut it down to just the contact, Captain Superior and one reoccuring named helper who dies in the second to last mission.

Why is the player working for Solus? Since this apparently isn't an SG initiation arc despite all appearances to the contrary, I'd highly advise coming up with better hooks and possibly pulling Solus out of the limelight a bit. Maybe make a Vanguard contact instead that has you work with Solus more and more culminating in the same climax.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is going to be long, and probably meander a bit, but it covers everything you’re asking about here.

In writing, there is a technique called association. The idea is to use a situation or a comparison which gives the reader a schema, or a frame of reference, which allows him or her to relate to (and hopefully sympathize with) a character or a situation in a story.

In this instance, what was chosen to build the schema was for the player character to work with a supergroup. Obviously, supergroup membership could not be assumed without trampling all over the player character’s commitments and backstory; thus, why one is assumed to be a freelance hero (or a hero at loose ends belonging to another organization) who is willing to help out this small group.

But why a supergroup, and a no-name supergroup at that? Why not give your player character a chance to be a member of the Phalanx, rub shoulders with Statesman, save the world?

Answer: Because let’s face it, the only thing any of our characters would have been doing for the Phalanx at that time or any other is carrying coffee. To me, it’s not only *not* believable to expect my character to be a member of the Phalanx or other big-name group, it infringes upon canon and game history.

We also cannot change canon or history. The Titanic’s dead didn’t get rescued at the last minute, and 200+ heroes who were victims of that Rikti attack have to stay dead. Period. Therefore, your character cannot save the world in this particular arc. But that wasn’t the point of it, anyway.

So, why make the character work with this no-name bunch of superheroes? And why *this* group? Is it just a freebie plug? (You don’t say this, per se, but I’m assuming you’re suspecting it, and hey, I can't blame you.)

To the question of ‘why this group’: The Collective was always a fictional group. The *Foundation* is not, but the *Collective* never existed. The reason the Collective was used was because we owned the characters and concept. As such, Dalghryn felt justified (and safe) in using those characters as superhero redshirts.

The same could not be said for any other established canon-lore groups or characters. Besides, for professional reasons, I’m hyperallergic to copyright issues, and I would have griped at him ceaselessly about that.

As far as the ‘plug’ accusation – frankly, we don’t need it and wouldn’t want it. We’re pretty picky about membership and we don’t, as a rule, recruit.

(Okay, to clarify before I get peppered with buckshot for that comment. We’re not snobs; we’re always happy to play with other RP-friendly people. But everyone seems pretty happy with the current nice, medium-sized stable group. We’ve both already run huge groups in other games, and neither of us can afford the time drain or headache of running a massive SG, much less one on two servers, nor do we want to have to deal with the personnel issues which arise from a bunch of unknowns. But I digress.)

I personally think the link should be removed entirely to eliminate this confusion, but it ain’t my arc, and I leave that up to his discretion. However, the worst he’s guilty of here is providing an overload of information.

So, why make the player character work with a supergroup at all?

Because that is what gives us the schema for the events which occurred. Many of us have been in supergroups. Even if we have not, we all have an understanding of the dynamics within such a group. Moreover, many of us have mentored other beginning characters or have been mentored ourselves. Most of us have also been in a situation where we’ve gotten over our heads and asked for assistance from other members in our supergroup or from members in coalition supergroups. Therefore, a normal supergroup is a structure we all understand. It becomes our schema for the events which then transpire.

It isn’t necessary, in this instance, for the character to feel as if they are a member of SOLUS. It is, however, expected that through association, the character can make the leap and think, ‘Wow, how might this have affected *my* group back in those times?’

It’s also hoped that, through the attrition of those NPCs, that the player can actually get a frame of reference as to how that event could have impacted supergroups at the time. Thus, the number of NPCs listed.

For example, if you tell me that the bubonic plague killed ¼ of the population of Europe, I get the idea that, okay, yeah, a lot of people died. However, if you tell me that it’s like every fourth person I know dropping dead, I get a much better idea of what the emotional impact of that event probably was.

Again, association and schema. If you didn't have a number of people to start with, the illustration wouldn't work.

The final reason *not* to choose a big group like Vanguard or the Phalanx as the illustrative working group is to add the element of risk.

Let’s face it, the Vanguard, no matter how poorly equipped, still had UN backing. It still had more resources and funds than the average SG out there. And the Phalanx? Come on, these are the biggest of the big shots. Could we really feel any uncertainty if we knew we were running with these guys? Besides, we *know* a good chunk of the Phalanx, including States, survived. How worked up can we get over the safety of these people? Answer: we can’t.

However, the NPCs in this arc, while clearly of sufficient level to do some good, are also not anybody we recognize as having survived. Clearly, they’re hanging on teeth and toenails, and they’re not too proud to ask for your help. Can you really believe that States is in such poor shape that he’s going to go begging your character for help? I really can’t believe that either a) my character would be on that kind of professional terms with States or the Phalanx and b) that the egos of some of the Phalanx members would permit it. After all, States may ask you to do his task force, but he’s not going to go help you with it. (Heck, he doesn’t even help you with ambushes!)

The point is, the survival of none of these characters is assured, especially once the body count starts rolling. To put it back in Titanic terms, most of the big-name NPC groups consist of first-class passengers we know were on the list of survivors. The SOLUS people, on the other hand, are the third-class passengers who were never found or identified. Not only can we believe they can die, we can realize uneasily that, in some respects, there are those among the first-class passengers who may have regarded this bunch as throwaways.

Anyway, as usual, I’ve knocked out a book I really didn’t have time to write in the first place. Time to set it aside and get back to the baby gift thank you notes I’ve been putting off for waaaaay too long.

~Elizabeth

As the aforementioned 'lovely wife' complimented by Dalghryn, I wanted to add my two cents on Rise of Drakule.

I'll start by saying that, marriage (and compliments) aside, Dalghryn's opinions and ratings are his own, and vice versa. My take's as follows, and I hope it is of some use. I provide it only because it differed from his in several respects.

[u]Technical/Mechanical[u]: Overall, very good. The directions were clear and easily understood. The speech patterns and dialogue were well chosen and helped to characterize the villains. The powersets were consistent for the characters. The maps were well chosen for the missions in question and the custom villains well designed.

With one exception, spelling and grammar were fine. The one spelling exception was ‘alright’, which should be spelled ‘all right’. (Ashton says this in the first mission.) As I used to tell my English class, ‘all right’ is never ‘alright’.

Ashton, as an AV, was fine. I agree with Dalghryn that Drakule was overpowered. We ran a blaster/tank duo without a debuffer, but we generally have about a 75/25 success rate on AVs. We took down Ashton with little difficulty.

I don't expect to take down every AV we encounter. However, given Drakule's regen rate with a duo, I'd think the only way he could have been taken down as an AV would be with a couple of debuffers. That's a type of mission objective that's irritating to me, since it puts powerset abilities over player strategy.

We did not, however, take out the third bride before taking down Drakule. As we're told that Drakule can't be permanently killed without taking down all three brides, it may well be that he would have been significantly weakened had we done so. If that's the case, I retract my objection to Drakule's strength and applaud you for setting up a tactical problem.

In my opinion, two AVs in one mission are too many. AVs tend to be a grindfest if you do not have a debuffer on the team and are not running in a large team. One AV is fine, but two in one mission tend to make the mission drag. While one can scale down, doing so frequently robs the rest of the mission of sufficient challenge.

If you do keep the two AVs, I’d suggest putting a note on the splash page telling players what to expect. I know the mission notes do say to expect EBs/AVs, but if it’s in the instructions, all team members can see it and prepare accordingly.

One other note: Ashton refers to his opponents as ‘dude’ and ‘bro’. While ‘dude’ is arguably a unisex term, ‘bro’ really isn’t.

I’m a female gamer and I play female characters, so it really throws me out of immersion when a game or mission refers to all characters as male. Try turning it around to where the game refers to your male character as ‘girlfriend’, or 'girl', and you’ll see what I mean!

(BTW, you're far from alone. I'm about ready to write an arc with a male contact who treats everyone as females, just to see the reaction.)

I did notice we weren’t picking up many tickets on the second mission as we usually do. Not sure if that’s due to the custom villains or if it was a temporary bug in the system.

[u]Content[u]: The arc had good tongue in cheek humor. I got a good giggle from the Goth and Dracula parodies, myself -- once I realized they were supposed to be parodies.

However, if one didn’t get to see the mission listing, there was no way to know it was intended to be humorous until the second meeting with the contact. To be in keeping with the rest of the arc, the contact needs to be as much of a parody as the villains. If he was, the whole thing would be hilarious.

In character, my heroine had a bit of a problem with essentially being told to kill Dracule and his followers without mercy. While the contact does state that we shouldn’t worry about it, the fact is, heroes are, after all, supposed to be arresting, not killing. If this were a villainous instead of a neutral arc, I'd have no objection.

Too, undead and unholy aren’t the same thing. One’s not living and the other’s a matter of religious perspective. To be told to slay a bunch of undead or demonic things is one thing (they’re not alive, after all) but to be told to go slay a bunch of living people this person considers ‘unholy’ is quite another, even in a humorous arc.

However, if the contact was exaggerated enough from the outset to let all the players know it’s intended as a parody *and* if we're told all the targets are undead or demonic, the problem would be solved and heroic characters could proceed without conflict.

Thank you for putting this together for everyone and for the opportunity to play it. Coming up with an idea for a parody, much less writing a good one like this, is considerably more difficult than a standard mission, and I very much appreciate your time and effort! We'll definitely be running your villainous arcs with our bad kids.

~Elizabeth

[ QUOTE ]
I dont think that would help. It takes a couple minutes to create a one mission kill-all mission. The people who are really out for blood would have no problem getting around this very minor hurdle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can, but likely will not. It requires effort, and such types are not generally inclined to make even minimal effort on that end. It's like a kid who enjoys vandalism -- the quick stone through a window or a fast car key. Sticking around and really working at it isn't for them. They want to lob a rotten egg and run.

If they'd fix the zero-star bug, that would help, too. I think that's happened to me a couple of times.

[ QUOTE ]
Another proposal is to weight the responses.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd add this to the mix, too. It won't work standing alone because griefers *are* more likely to run a mission, but in combination, it would raise the ratings bar still more.

Granted, none of these suggestions are perfect, but nothing involving a ratings system will be, which is why overall I'm still for ditching the star system and the Dev Choices, while we're at it. The number of Dev Choice arcs aren't increasing with any regularity, and there are a *lot* of very good arcs out there.

IMO (and no offense intended, as I still appreciate the effort involved), some of the Dev Choice arcs aren't half as good as some of the ones that are just in the Hall of Fame. They tend to be just more of the same rather than something really creative and unpredictable.

I'm with the person who suggested making the search feature more robust and give the description section more space. That will help us more than the current ratings system ever could.

Last but not least, people really need to learn how to give constructive feedback. Effective critiquing is an art, but it's not one that's difficult to learn.

~Elizabeth

I'd go for not being able to rate a mission unless you've got a currently published mission. Allow everyone to provide feedback, but only allow published authors to rate.

*I* would be one of those who would not be able to vote, by the way.

This would help the ratings system in two ways.

One, I guarantee a lot of the one-star griefers will never write an arc. They aren't the type who will spend their time producing something for others to enjoy. Therefore, they can't vote. If they do manage to publish something, then they're opening themselves up to being treated as they've treated others.

Two, anyone who's actually written a mission will know more about the abilities and limitations of the mission architect. It's very easy to be hypercritical when one doesn't realize that there are simply things one cannot do without running smackdab into memory limitations, program limitations, or what have you.

FYI, while I have not written an arc, my husband's written two, and watching him agonize over them have certainly given me a different perspective than I would have had otherwise.

This should pretty much limit all griefing to nasty feedback comments, which can be /petitioned and dealt with appropriately.

[ QUOTE ]
Since there are people out there saying "I'm maliciously voting things down," and I've seen the evidence with my own eyes, I'm inclined to believe it, too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't happen to me, but did happen to a friend of mine. Someone asked on a channel for recommendations on some arcs to try. My friend mentioned his arc and said he'd been trying to get some more people to play it so he could get input about how to tweak it. No spamming, no begging, just an answer to the question.

Lo and behold, someone said that because my friend said he was trying to get people to play it, said someone was deliberately going to play it and one rate it, just to 'teach him a lesson'.

Had I not seen it on channel, I wouldn't have believed it. But there it was. What a maroon.

The stated low-rater *did* play the arc, *did* give it a one star, and even stated in the comments that it wasn't because of the content, but because he'd tried to 'solicit plays'. Excuse me? How is that helpful to *anyone*?

Y'know, if my friend had been spamming, that would have been one thing (although personally, I still think that would have been an abuse of the ratings system). However, he wasn't, and I, for one, am always glad to see people mention an arc they've done. And hey, someone was *asking* for arcs to be recommended!!

The star system needs to be gutted for the same reason that the rankings on the message boards were eliminated: too much potential for abuse by trolls. It's a sad thing, because it *could* be very useful. Unfortunately, as it is, if it's not abuse by trolls, it's artificially inflated ratings to avoid hurting feelings. Either way, the information's rarely accurate.

~Elizabeth

You have my sympathy.

Although your patience for fools is far greater than mine.

~Elizabeth