Liquid

Renowned
  • Posts

    1185
  • Joined

  1. I don't have any suggestions to make at this time, but welcome to the forums, Honey Badger!
  2. Thank you very much for making the odds public.
  3. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zwillinger View Post
    Our practices, discussed at great length and worked out with the Community, are: Unique pieces for females and everything else equally ported between the body types. Yes, this ends up resulting in more pieces for females overall, however after the last 12 months of reading feedback and lengthy discussion with the Community we made this decision.
    I want to add something to this: for those lamenting extra work focused on female parts, please remember that males have two body types, so if there were an even number of parts for each gender, extra work would still be spent on males.

    If females get a few extra typically-for-females parts like dresses, heels, and corsets, it helps keep the work spent on each gender to be somewhat equal, while minimizing the "I wish I had that part" reaction from the people who play male characters.

    There is no option to make everyone happy. If we have 100% gender parity in parts, then males get more options (due to the second body type) and females don't get any "girly" (for lack of a better word) stuff, and if we have 100% gender parity in workload, males get significantly less parts (not necessarily half, but not a trivial amount less). If we have 100% parity in number of parts but give females more "girly" options, then we get situations like the Gunslinger pack (prior to this update). They're trying to find a compromise between those three options, and it means males have more work spent on them, and females get a few more parts.

    I can't really see a more fair way to do it.
  4. Holy crap! Thank you so much, I can't wait to make use of those jackets!

    P.S. This means I'm buying the Gunslinger pack when this goes live.
  5. Wow, this is really exciting!

    I'm glad you're considering a non-glow version of the suit. I'd rather not have the glow for my characters that would use it.
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Thunderfire View Post
    There is a growing body of research in the microtransaction market that indicates that limited-time offers, both in terms of pricing and availability, are actually highly effective. Pretty solid numbers too, not just ephemeral trends subject to interpretation.
    Just FYI for those who might be interested-- I totally believe this in many cases. But just because it makes more money doesn't mean it's good for the game.

    I'm one of those people that, unlike Roger Ebert, thinks of video games as art. I want Paragon Studios to make as much money as they can without sacrificing their art or crossing ethical lines. Obviously art is highly subjective, and so "sacrificing art for money" is also going to be highly subjective. But if I were in a decision making position for a game whose major focuses are superheroes and customization, one of the reasons that I would not want to time-limit costume parts for the sake of making more money is that, in my opinion, the artistic value of having higher quality costume parts, or unique parts that enable specific concepts, available year-round is too high to give up for extra profit.

    Now, if CoH is in danger of going under without these kinds of methods, then I understand and reluctantly support them, as sacrificing some of the art is better than losing all of it. But I'm operating under the assumption that they are in no such danger.
  7. Quote:
    Originally Posted by TrueGentleman View Post
    The limited time availability makes less sense, however, than offering this for a discount now and at full price for the rest of the year.
    What would make the most sense would be to not include the Pocket D porter (edit: and emotes) for the rest of the year, like how other costume bundles are set up. That would still create a spike in sales now by people who missed the original Pocket D porter, and leave the costume parts available for purchase by new and returning players in the coming months.
  8. Why make such awesome, upgraded jeans and casual shirts, and limit them to being purchasable only one month out of the year? It doesn't make any sense to me that you want to restrict such commonly used costume parts like this. I know you guys think the jeans from 2004 are showing their age. Don't you want new players in March through January of next year to see this level of quality in the costume creator?

    I know I sound like a broken record now, but I want this pack, yet I'm not buying it because I disagree with the time restriction, and posting and not buying it are the only things I can do to try to convince you that it would be good for the game to have them available year-round. Putting a time restriction on this pack makes the least sense of all the packs you've done it to.

    The parts are so good, too. It just doesn't make any sense to me that you wouldn't want them out there as much as possible. Please consider making them available year-round.

    Also, your formatting is broken at the bottom, there. Looks like you used HTML instead of BBCode.
  9. Personally, I think Incendiary Ammo shots look a lot like heat-ray blasts.
  10. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zwillinger View Post
    Do me a favor everyone:

    Please don't try to influence other people's votes. We want for everyone to vote their own preference (if there was an option to do this completely blind, we would).
    Oh. Does this mean we aren't supposed to say what we voted? Ooops. I just got excited and wanted to share.
  11. I love them all, but I picked A for the big rings on the front.
  12. B is the classic retro sci-fi ray gun. But I'd be happy with any of them. All of these designs are so great.
  13. I went with A, but again, I'd be happy with any of them. They all look retro-sci fi, but A is a little less Jetson looking, allowing for slightly less cheesy retro-sci fi concepts. (Not that I don't like cheese!)
  14. Voted for B because I liked the talk-box on it the most, but honestly, I'd be happy with any of them, with a slight lean toward A and B for the talk-box.

    The important thing is, they're all bubble helmets! Woohoo!
  15. I voted C because I feel the accordion joints are essential to a retro sci-fi suit. I do hope the body parts are some sort of flexible material, and not metal. And I'm hoping it's shiny, but not color-reflective.

    I do wish we could have the chest detail from A with the accordion joints.

    It's awesome that we get to vote on this!
  16. Well, I was going to buy this pack as soon as it hit live, but with the time limitation, I'm going to have to decline as another vote against the practice. It's not tied to any holiday (sticking a single Valentine's day related item in there that also happens to be Roman doesn't make the rest of the pack Valentine's day related), so I don't see the reason for the artificial scarcity. It's a great convenience buy, and I think new players should have the opportunity to buy it throughout the year.

    I also agree with those who are saying that the ITF doesn't need any costume part incentives to get people to run it.

    Sorry, Ghost Falcon.
  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hobbes View Post
    So let the no-animation travel powers use a stun like debuff. When stunned, offensive toggles drop but not the defensive ones, ctrl-clicked powers dont fire, we cannot start any animation at all and stumble around slowly.

    Just switch the stumble around slowly with zoom around on a board / carpet / 4 legs.
    Maybe that's a start for them-- they'd need to make sure Blaster Defiance doesn't ignore it, and that Break Frees, Domination, or other use-while-disabled abilities don't work (as they all have animations) as well, leaving just the travel toggles as being able to be activated/deactivated.

    I have no idea whether that helps them at all, but it's a good suggestion based on our limited knowledge. Thanks.
  18. FYI, Foot Stomp does not work. Accelerate Metabolism and Radiant Aura do. So it looks like PBAoE buffs/heals do work, but only on yourself (but more importantly they animate), and PBAoE attacks don't work (or animate).
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Socorro View Post
    I'd swear I couldn't 'footstomp' while 'only self affected', but you're probably right.
    Hmm, actually I think you're right. I'm not 100% sure though, I think you may be able to activate the power, but it doesn't affect anyone else. I'll have to test it later to be sure.

    Quote:
    What would such a hypothetical tech be called? 'really really only affecting self'?
    How about Power Activation Disabling?
  20. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Socorro View Post
    It does seem like they could have made the purchased travel powers 'affecting only self' instead of de-toggling everything. That wouldn't have required redoing any animations.

    That they didn't must mean even that's more difficult that it would seem on the surface. Even so, I'd like them much more (ie. buy them and use them) if they did 'affect only self'. No one really knows if there's enough like me that would then purchase them to make it worth the Dev's time.
    You can still activate toggles, PBAoE buffs/heals and self-targeted clicks (like Reconstruction, Unstoppable, SoW, and Dull Pain) while "only affecting self", and those all have animations, so unfortunately, it wouldn't resolve the issue. They need new tech.

    If they don't feel it's worth the resources to create tech that allows toggles to remain on but not be activated, then I hope they'll consider modifying the current tech to at least not disable passive powers, as those do not have any animations attached to them.
  21. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kioshi View Post
    What about not detoggling, only suppressing toggle powers? I love my Rocket Board for getting around with my non-travel power toons (and even the speedsters and superjumpers for big travels) but retoggling is a pain, I have toons with 8+ toggles.
    I don't know why people are asking for suppression. That wouldn't solve the issue. The powers aren't detoggled because they want them shut off for balance reasons. They are detoggled because they need to be disabled to keep people from turning them on while on the hoverboard-- turning them on requires an animation, and allowing them to be turned on while on the hoverboard would mean new animations for all toggles.

    What you should be asking for is new tech that allows toggles and passives to remain on when activating the hoverboard if the toggles are already on, but not to be activated if they're off. That would prevent people from using animations while on the board, but would still allow toggles and passives to remain on.
  22. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Anchor View Post
    He used to do some very funny scripted dialogue next to Paragon City's payphones.

    http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Ascendant-O%27s
    (link fixed)

    He's also got a VirtueVerse profile if you want to read about the character (I don't feel his current profile pic really represents him well, though-- he looks very angry, and Big A is a pretty friendly guy). He's written some short stories as well, if you click his user page and scroll to the bottom.

    Ascendant is also a really nice, humble guy. His CoH-fame hasn't gone to his head.

    Yeah, if they do choose a player character to join the Phalanx, and he wants it (he may not, I don't know), I'd vote for Ascendant if it was open for voting.
  23. As cool as it was to have a fan-made character added to the Surviving Eight, for this situation I would prefer one of the following:

    1) Back Alley Brawler is offered the position and accepts.

    2) Your character is offered the position ("your" meaning everyone that runs the arc). You have the opportunity to decline if you want.
  24. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rabid_M View Post
    A valid reason, with the costume parts just along for the ride.
    Agreed. I now care and am happy about this feature being implemented.

    I hope we'll have ways to see who isn't VIP for iTrials, as well as ways to see alignment for DFB and the like (let me know if there currently is a display for those, I haven't noticed one).
  25. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. DJ View Post
    Why does it matter? It's of no consequence to anyone.
    I personally don't care whether this feature goes live or not, but if it was of no consequence to anyone, why would they spend development time on it? Obviously it is of consequence to someone.