Lothic

Forum Cartel
  • Posts

    6294
  • Joined

  1. Wow tell us how you really feel about it.

    Anyway both of these games will likely always have "NPC only" costume items regardless of the technical competence of their respective designers. The Devs of CoX have specifically told us that they will always restrict some items from players so that their special NPCs will remain special. Sure it would be nice to have some of these things, but if it hasn't happened yet it's not bound to. There's no reason to suspect the Devs of CO won't follow suit with this policy and also restrict certain items from their players.
  2. I tend to see the addition of new Master badges as a bit of compensation for the Devs making so many other badges semi-easy now in I16. At least these Master badges require some legitimate player skill that you can't ensure with other badges which can be easily AFK farmed.

    As an FYI there are people I know who hated the idea of the first two Master badges so I'm sure they hate the addition of new ones too. Can't please everyone... *shrugs*
  3. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chase_Arcanum View Post
    Well, there's the idea that the "August 15, 2009 to November 15, 2009" roughly corresponds to the first 3 months ( including open beta) of a direct competitor. Knowing that you AT LEAST remained a paying customer during that period has some value.

    My concern is this: Nov. 15-Jan 5. would be a TERRIBLE time to start closed betas. The holidays are approaching. People take time off. That means there's fewer man-hours to respond to the critical flaws that would crop up that early on. Patches would be slower coming.

    At the same time, the holiday stressors (and shorter days... and the start of winter "cabin fever) can make even the most helpful playtester agitated... imagine what it'd do to the average forumite... not to mention they're playing a buggy pre-release product that isn't getting patches or dev responses to the problems in what the forumite sees as a "timely manner" (i.e. usually 15-20 minutes after their post)

    I'd almost expect them to delay closed beta until mid-January just to avoid all that....

    ... which WOULD put them on schedule for a possible anniversary launch...
    Well since I think you are bending over backwards to paint a gloomy picture that "holiday beta testing is a bad™ thing" I'll counter with this observation: Most people have some kind of winter/holiday break from school/work during December. This timeframe might actually allow -more- testers to be available to do some testing with spare time they might not normally have.

    I seriously doubt a gaming company with a big expansion lined up is going to let the holidays affect their ability to do their jobs quite as seriously as you're suggesting. At least you agree that GR is likely to happen more towards the first half of next year instead of the last half so I'll cut you some slack.
  4. My main hero badger had 722 badges before I15 deleted roughly 80 AE badges from the game.
    Some of the top badgers who (in retrospect) wasted the time to get all the original AE badges had upwards to 740+ badges.
  5. I've noticed a few things kind of like what you're describing in relation to the Day Jobs. So far none of these "hiccups" have resulted in permanent problems. Most of the time these things seem to correct themselves when I zone or relog.

    I think it just has to do with how these GUIs first populate themselves with new data when you first log in. There seems to be a bit of timing problem between when the badges trigger and when the game checks all the timers for all the badges. Again I think it's mostly a display timing problem and not a "real" bug if you understand what I mean. Well strictly speaking I guess you could call it a bug, but not really one that's bad enough that it needs serious Dev attention. *shrugs*
  6. As I implied/predicted a few days ago in this thread there's really nothing "traditional" about the timing of this particular Issue. Based on the significance September 1st has on the superhero MMO world I still would not be surprised to see this Issue go live next Tuesday or at least by the end of next week.
  7. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shocktor View Post
    2010?

    I'm sticking by my 18 months prediction, but it could be 12 months (we'll see it Spring or Fall 2010).

    WoW just announced it's expansion -- we won't see that for 18 months (Lich King was 18 months from announcement to release)

    I don't see CoH doing any differently...
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sardan View Post
    Sadly, I think you're right. I believe someone previously pointed out that the time between CoV announce and launch was also > 12 months. I don't know if it was a full 18 months, but the point is that it certainly wouldn't be without precedent.
    I still don't understand why people continue to ignore the obvious evidence that the Going Rogue beta is likely going to be starting before the end of -this- year, not late next year.

    1) The Going Rogue beta announcement refers to the specific time period of August 15, 2009 to November 15, 2009 and to 60+ month vets in relation to who will be getting into which wave of the Going Rogue closed beta. Why on earth would they establish those parameters for a closed beta that you're predicting might not happen for another full year AFTER those dates and Vet awards have any significance? If your prediction is right wouldn't it make more sense to establish a loyalty time period some time next summer and key off say the 72+ month Vet awards for this?

    2) We got our first public announcement of the Going Rogue Expansion all the way back in August 2008. True that "announcement" came in the form of a low-key market survey, but nonetheless the general "strong hint" that an expansion was in the works was publicly declared in August 2008. So even if we go by the debatable metric that it takes "around 18 months" for any MMO expansions to get released then I would point out that the January/February 2010 timeframe would sync up to that perfectly.

    I realize it's safe to assume that MMOs always follow some kind of "Standard Plan" when it comes to expansion releases. But don't let that kind of thing blind you to the obvious evidence we have available in this particular situation.
  8. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nevarc View Post
    If you really want to reward us gamers for our loyalty, then why not give us a reward that will keep us loyal like discount the monthly fee. Or even offer a lifetime subscription as a veteran reward.
    As a long time Vet of this game I have no problem with "maintaining" my loyalty by continuing to support this game with my money.

    Basically you are suggesting you will be more "loyal" to this game as long as you don't have to support it anymore. That's kind of like saying you promise to be a better U.S. citizen as long people stop encouraging you to vote.
  9. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lothic View Post
    Yeah it certainly is coming down to the wire if they had any serious plans to push it out the door by Sept 1st. Of course there's no "set-in-stone" rules to closed/open betas either. For all we know the Devs might decide that letting it go open beta over the weekend would be enough for this Issue. That would certainly allow it to "interfere" with that other game's headstart as much as possible.

    The three key features publicly known about for I16 (power customization, mission difficulty settings, super-sidekicking) are all things that have been in closed beta for several weeks now. These features are not completely trivial but they are certainly less complex than say the entire AE system. If they all aren't already reasonably working this very minute then I'd say we might as well not even worry about this thing being ready by October if they are having -that- much trouble with it.

    Basically Sept 1st is looking unlikely now, but I wouldn't say it's completely impossible quite yet.
    I wish someone out there would have predicted this might happen.
  10. While I'd be in favor of a travel power booster pack I suspect that the animation work it would take to allow for these things would not be as trivial as you'd think.

    Remember the difficulty Devs had with getting a workable set of flight poses: They worked on them for many months through several patches and finally had to settle on the emote solution. While the emotes are cool enough many people don't really like them that way because they are cumbersome to use without keybinding them.

    I figure the only way we'll ever get new travel powers in CoX is for them to be part of a paid booster pack like this. They would take so much extra work that's probably the only way our Devs could justify the time and effort involved.
  11. Quote:
    Originally Posted by macskull View Post
    This is incorrect. The real current inf cap is something like 40 billion inf on one character - just bid 2 billion inf on a recipe or enhancement that doesn't exist (such as a level 53 LotG or a level 1 Hami) and fill 19 of your maximum of 20 market slots with such bids. I know of at least two people who have double-digit billions on multiple toons (I'm not one, unfortunately).

    Additionally, lowering the inf cap will accomplish nothing, just like setting price caps will accomplish nothing. People will simply start looking at off-market sources for their IOs and using multiple characters to fund the transactions. If you think prices and supply are bad now, hooooooooo boy would you be in for a shock if we had price caps.
    Well first off I never advocated lowering the 2 billion INF cap.
    I'm one of the people who think its serving its purpose at its current value well enough as it is.

    As to those people who are tricking the market in order to horde more than 2 billion INF I have no problem with that either. If anything that shows there's really no reason for the game to raise the 2 billion cap because there is a workaround for those few people who really want to do that.

    There's always going to be a few top end farmers who manage to horde ungodly amounts of INF but fortunately the number of people doing that is very tiny and basically insignificant economically speaking. Raising the 2 billion cap for everyone would make inflation rise in general because that would enable/encourage far more people to join the 2+ billion club than exists now.

    Basically 99.9% of the player population has no need to be able to horde more than 2 billion INF and the remaining 0.1% have a way to manipulate the market to manage it anyway. Why should the Devs change anything?
  12. Quote:
    Originally Posted by AquaJAWS View Post
    I could be off on this, but didn't they raise the inf cap at some point to 2 billion. I seem to recall seeing that it used to be much lower when the game started and they bumped it I think around the time the market did come around.
    As far as I'm aware the 2 billion INF cap has been in place since the beginning of the game. The cap on how much INF you can trade per trade has been increased twice. That started out at 9,999 INF, was raised to 99,999 INF then finally raised to 999,999,999 INF when the markets were established. But the overall cap of 2 billion has never changed.

    The Leader badge (the badge for earning 2 billion INF from combat) has been around for many years as well. I suspect the Devs decided having a 2 billion INF cap and having the top INF badge go for 2 billion matched up well enough "round-number" wise to have both of those values remain the same for so long.
  13. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lazarillo View Post
    Well, what I can say, given as I have suddenly been called out of town for the rest of the week, is that it's safe to assume that either Open Beta will be coming before Friday, or that, at least, I'll get a Beta invite before that point!

    On a less personal level, I really can't imagine i16 is even close to actually being live-ready, which means a CO-competing release is highly unlikely, which, in turn, to my mind, means the Devs can take a bit of time on this and make sure it goes particularly well, with plenty of testing and bug-busting. Or, summarily, if it's not going to be live in the next week (and I'd say 99% that won't happen), I wouldn't expect it until very late September/early October.
    The problem with this "sensible Dev" assumption is that the Devs have already shown that when other games are concerned they are willing to be less than sensible.

    I12 was released live the very same day Age of Conan went live after a very short (and probably not long enough) open beta period. Coincidentally I12 was the issue that gave us Cimerora, the "swords and shields" zone. Can you think of anything in I16 (*cough* Power Customization) that's directly aimed at what CO is offering?

    I'm certainly not going to assume the Devs will push I16 too much just to meet the Sept 1st "deadline". But based on their past history I'm not prepared to put it past them this time.
  14. Quote:
    Originally Posted by CoyoteShaman View Post
    Keeping in mind that I agree with your last sentence, I have to argue the logic based on the extrapolation you're making.

    You're saying that the prices will drop because the supply will increase. The supply will increase because more farming will be done. So far so good. The problem is that same increase in farming will also increase the supply of new influence into the equation at the same relative rate as the increased supply of purples/etc. Therefore there will be no change in the relative supply/demand equation. The supply/demand of the purples is only half of the equation; the other half is the supply/demand of the influence. Since both sides of the equation are going to be increased by the same amount, the relationship between the two will not change due to farming increases.

    If there are other changes which will cause an increase in the supply of purples without increasing the supply of inf (or decreasing the supply of inf without decreasing the supply of purples), then yes it would lower the price of the purples.

    Up to now, however, I have heard of nothing which would cause such a relative change.

    I'd recommend "Human Action" by Ludwig von Mises for an excellent primer on economies, except I haven't read all of it yet so it would likely make me look really stupid later on when someone asked me more about it and I couldn't answer. I've only read selected articles/sections but even in those there has been some excellent information.

    Robin
    Your assumption of my "purple supply" conclusion is incorrect.

    I'm not assuming farming is going to significantly -increase- after I16. If anything it will likely decrease overall without the lure of PLing. But the truly significant shift will be that people will likely start to farm more non-AE oriented things once the rewards with the new difficulty settings become possible.

    Look at it this way: If I'm a farmer why would I do things like the AE that get me lots of INF with -no- chance for purples instead of traditional farms which will get me lots of INF -and- purple drops.

    The "economics" of that is obvious.
  15. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blastman View Post
    Well we can write off Sept 1 as a release day for I16. Unless they skip open beta and just release i. Then work out kinks as they appear. I wish we could get a red name to comment
    Yeah it certainly is coming down to the wire if they had any serious plans to push it out the door by Sept 1st. Of course there's no "set-in-stone" rules to closed/open betas either. For all we know the Devs might decide that letting it go open beta over the weekend would be enough for this Issue. That would certainly allow it to "interfere" with that other game's headstart as much as possible.

    The three key features publicly known about for I16 (power customization, mission difficulty settings, super-sidekicking) are all things that have been in closed beta for several weeks now. These features are not completely trivial but they are certainly less complex than say the entire AE system. If they all aren't already reasonably working this very minute then I'd say we might as well not even worry about this thing being ready by October if they are having -that- much trouble with it.

    Basically Sept 1st is looking unlikely now, but I wouldn't say it's completely impossible quite yet.
  16. The 2 billion cap on INF was probably a value that was considered more than adequate 5+ years ago when the game first started long before we even had a market. The fact that data of that size could be stored in a single 32-bit signed integer is a programming convenience, but I would not call the use of something like that a "technical limitation". Data structures can be created to store numbers much larger than that even in 32-bit environments. Software is not "keeping" this value set at 2 billion.

    But having said that I actually think keeping this value at 2 billion would be the best thing for this game.

    First of all it's an easy choice because nothing is modified and no additional risk of bugs is introduced. Second it provides a practical hard cap on how much things can cost in this game. Nothing can ever be bought or sold that would ever cost more than 2 billion INF. Frankly I don't think any one single thing should ever cost anywhere near that much regardless. Finally it prevents people from hording more than 2 billion which would motivate the few people who get that much INF to spend/sink it into the game's economy in constructive ways. The -only- thing that allowing people to have more than 2 billion INF would do is encourage price inflation to grow.

    Finally as Demobot mentioned I suspect the supply of purples is going to increase after I16 anyway.
    The sidekicking/difficulty changes should lead to more farming of missions that would drop purples.
    More supply equals cheaper prices...
  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Manbeast View Post
    To be honest I just want the swinging travel power the most.
    To each their own I guess. I'm certainly not against the idea of a superhero MMO in general having a swinging travel power.
    But based on what I've seen of it I think the way CO did it looks very silly and poorly implemented.

    I suppose a person could argue "well at least CO -has- a swinging power."
    That's certainly true, but when it looks as bad as I think it looks it almost makes me have to ask why they even bothered.
    I would never use it as is. *shrugs*
  18. Quote:
    Originally Posted by magnus1 View Post
    i could see it as a 60 month vet reward. i mean seriously, after 60 months of paying they should get a shot at a lifetime membership. they paid their dues.
    I'd agree something like that would be nice from a player's point of view. It would make things fairly convenient for some people.

    But as others have said at this point in the game's lifecycle a lifetime sub offer could only be seen as a bad omen that the Devs have given up and expect the game to go down the tubes relatively quickly. I've been paying for this game annually for years now and that's close enough to a "lifetime sub" for me. Personally I still like this game enough that I actually don't mind giving them money for it. I consider it a vote of confidence from me for a job well done.
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by CoyoteShaman View Post
    I'd be happy with a vet reward pet that actually wouldn't die when someone sneezes.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zekiran_Immortal View Post
    Pff. If I move 5 yards, mine dies. I swear.
    I'll completely agree that there are many situations where if you just look at those pets funny they'll die.

    But I've also run entire missions without having them die on me. Of course there's usually at least one of two things going on with that. I'm either 1) soloing with a ranged oriented character so my Vet pet stays safely far away from MOBs or 2) I've been in teams that so completely buff the Vet pets up that they stay alive. That's how I've for example used them with my Brutes before.

    They certainly aren't easy to use and are clearly more useful to some ATs than others, but they aren't -totally- useless.
    Anyway my idea for "customizable pets" would probably be based on the non-killable hologram style Vet pets anyway.
  20. My main point was that I think anybody could rationalize the Kheldian same/different power color issue either way.
    But if the Devs make that rationalization their word is going to be law on the matter.
  21. While I think the idea of having access to your other characters directly as fully functional pets might be a bit overpowered and unbalanced it did give me an idea for a similar suggestion that might be a bit more doable:

    Allow for a pet that's pretty much exactly like the 36 month Vet pets (i.e. holograms with no in-game abilities) but allow us to create their appearance using the costume creator. The net effect is the ability to have a "sidekick" that follows us around like the Vet pets do but it'd look like anything we wanted it to look like.

    I think that would make for an awesome future Vet award.
  22. Well suggestions for improvements in sliders/options for those things have been continuously suggested for this game for years.

    I'm sure our Devs will do their best to push the features of this game to its limits, but I think we have to be realistic enough to realize that there are going to be hard restrictions on what this game will ever be able to do. Whether we'll ever get options equal to those other games is hard to say.

    Here's hoping of course.
  23. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Adeon_Hawkwood View Post
    The problem is that its a requirement for an accolade which means that ti gets a lot of negative press from non-badgers. I personally find purely cosmetic badges with insanely high requirements a lot more annoying than Accolade Requirement Badges with high requirements.
    Well accolade requirement badges certainly are "squeaky wheels" that'll likely get some grease whether they actually need it or not.
  24. I'm all for a "Power Customization, Part 2" that includes Kheldians.

    I'm just saying that as far as Khelds go I can see a rationalization for the Devs not getting to them if they for some reason don't. As a race it's perfectly reasonable for the Devs to explain that all of their powers would look the same from a colors point of view.
  25. I can accept this idea as a pure academic roleplay concept. But the fact that INF is the de facto economic currency in this game any idea to "degrade" it overtime is going to be a very tough sell.