Memphis_Bill

Um... that was removed some time ago, if I'm recalling correctly.

Edit: wiki entry:
(emphasis mine)

When was the testing done?

Huh. Nice. Tells you how much I actually pay attention to badges (including accolades, yeah) unless they unlock contacts

... and even that has to have NC or PS run a script to free up, plus it has to be over 90 days inactive.

I had to go check on the wiki. I could've sworn that Gangbuster was adjusted to take any Family boss. (Can't think of the last time I unlocked the Slot Machine contact, honestly.) Looks like it wasn't - or the wiki entry didn't get updated, one of the two, but with some of our rabid badgers I'd be surprised if the second were true.

And yet we have people complementing Power_NA on his improved posting, with his own history. If you have problems with the idea, then go after the idea on its own merits or lack of them. If you have problems with the poster, deal with them in PMs or put them on ignore.

These are not ongoing arguments on the same thing. The OP has every right to come in and say "Hey, it'd be nice to see this changed." Not much he's said has deserved the type of replies he's gotten - especially from you, I have to be honest and say. I've said before, I'm not the OP's biggest fan, but the reaction he's been getting is *way* out of line for some of these ideas. (Really? Did he have to be attacked for asking to have a line or two of *text* added? Really now? Step back and think about it.)

Task Force Commander tells its requirements flat out in its name - it requires task forces. It's fully appropriate. Requirements hero-vs-villainside have been out of whack in many instances from the start. Some have been fixed (see prior mention of removing Raider, as well as reductions in some requirements - like going from paying 1.2 million debt down to 200,000... which itself may be a bit of a stretch with patrol XP, debt reduction, etc. but is far more obtainable.)

With several of the suggestions made, I haven't seen a whine. A complaint? Sure. Then again, I've started several of *my* suggestions with a complaint. ("I tried doing X, only to find Y. This is irritating. How about this to fix it?")
Even when he has, he's been attacked. And I have to say some of them seem to be done specifically to attack the poster, with the suggestion not given reasonable consideration - even when the suggestion itself is reasonable in definition, presentation, scope and the work it would take to accomplish.

There's a difference between not sugar coating an answer and attacking them. You can be blunt and straightforward without being rude or getting personal.

For instance, in this very thread:

Look at your answer. You've got a *little* bit of a counter there, and a lot of attack. Now, blunt without getting personal?

"You can get a missed mayhem badge without much effort. No, you can't get them through Ouroboros, but:
- Are you in a Supergroup? Let them know you need X Mayhem exploration badge, hop in and get it.
- You're on the forums. Go down a bit to your server's forum and tell people you're trying for the accolade and need X mayhems.
- Tell the people on your friends/global friends list what you're going after. Ask them to let you know if/when they're running those."

Absolutely no need to get personal or "get into it" with the OP. He gets incorrect information corrected, and... well, I'll be blunt here as well, you don't look like an *** presenting it that way. Which means - useless "forum rep game" aside - people will be more likely to take you seriously in the future as well, instead of being seen as an "attack dog."

(Edit: Compare to your ouro reply to the same OP:
Correct information, and couldn't really be seen as an attack. A little smartalecky, but in a good way.
</end edit>)

It's something I'm saying from personal experience.

o.O

I don't think it's been possible to mis-situate a CPU for years, honestly. Intel CPUs, for instance, have a pair of notches on the sides near one end - if you try to set it in backwards or rotated, it just doesn't sit in the socket (and IIRC the 1366s are rectangular instead of square, so it'd look even more off-kilter if it were sideways.) AMD has pins missing in a non-symmetrical fashion (see the picture of Socket AM2+ here) so the CPU won't even sit in properly if it's not in correctly.

Sharker -

I said it in the other thread. I don't care if you don't like the OP. But this sort of post doesn't help.

Now, comparing the two accolades - for 5% extra END:
Villainside:
Two explorations and a history, that can be done solo.
A defeat, that can be done solo.
An accomplishment that can be done solo.
An Achivement - that requires a SF.

Heroside:

Exploration, that can be done solo.
History, that can be done solo.
Accomplishment, that can be done solo.
Two defeats, that can be done solo (and typically will be reached through normal gameplay.)

Yes, that seems like a disparity there. Honestly, I don't think I've ever *done* an LRSF. I can completely understand the idea that equivalent rewards should be given equivalent tasks.

There is also historical precedent - Born in Battle used to have a requirement to spend five hours in a PVP zone. No heroside accolade required exposure to PVP for so long - and with them moving the liasons out of the PVP zones, the developers had shown they understood some people didn't like dealing with PVP. The friction over the requirements for that badge (especially when they were *broken* for so long and not awarding properly for time in zone) led to them removing that requirement. (Still requires going in for an exploration and history badge, but given the limited number of zones redside overall, that requirement's nowhere near as onerous.)

Accolades have been reduced to more-equitable requirements before. This is not a request from out in left field.

As far as Task Force Commander - That, really, I don't agree with. It's for running task forces. The requirements are the same, even if the levels aren't.

... UM...You have gone in from villainside and looked at the contact, yes? The.. *cough* Evil Scientist?



Besides, posting history or not (and as I'd said elsewhere, I'm not exactly a *fan* of the OP,) both Sharker and yourself jumped down his throat *immediately.* Without regard to the initial post (aside from Sharker's "And you couldn't figure this out from all the other temp powers..." comment, most of which *are not refillable.*)

He did say flat out he had not run across that before. Nothing in his prior experience, according to him, would tell him the power doesn't refill. There was nothing in the original post that deserved having his case "climbed on."

Please note this is "Suggestions and ideas," not "Player Questions." He came in, the suggestion spelled out in the title, and posted in the appropriate place. He hasn't edited the title, as all the Re: entries have the exact same one.

Sorry, je_saist, but you and Sharker are very much in the wrong here with your reactions. Don't like the OP personally (or because of his post history?) Fine - but the reaction that the OP has gotten from you two is way out of line. The suggestion is reasonable and comparitively easy to implement (saying that from Joe Moressey's comment about AE being a subset of the tools they made for themselves - adding two lines of text would likely not be a horrible, labor intensive prospect.)

And to ask, you have to ask the right person. While, yes, TCS has access here, not everybody does come here, nor does everyone know about Paragon Wiki. Common sense, after all, should tell you you need to know you HAVE someplace to look something up before going there to do so.

I stress, above, "you have to ask the right person." Not everyone has the right information - I'm sure if I went about randomly asking people in game, I'd be told Shivans can't be refilled at all (like most temp powers,) or that they can be refilled at any time, or any number of other things. It's no different than "Stealth powers keep Heavies from spawning in invasions," which I've had people argue with me over even after telling them the fact they were wrong had confirmation directly from the dev team.

There is no fault in asking for this information - for a temp power that, being renewable itself, is in sparse company - to be put into its description, any more than specifying when a power has a timer whether it's time in use, time in game, or real time.

Also, powers will always be added to this game, or changed. Who, then, should someone ask, or where should they go to look it up? The help system tends not to get updated, and at this point is a tad unwieldy. And again, not everyone knows about Paragon Wiki (for instance,) nor would they know - if they happened to look up the name - if they're going to the correct one (the Wikia site being out of date and hijacked.)

This information should be in game, obvious and accessible to all.

Icons - hold down alt and use your mouse scroll wheel to adjust the size.

Actually... about the only things that needs screwing in, depending on case, are the power supply (if not shipped preinstalled to the case) and mainboard to the standoffs. And even then I think there are some toolless connectors (haven't seen one myself, but I believe I've seen them mentioned.) Often hard drives, CD drives, case sides, etc. are toolless. Memory clips in, the CPU clips in, fans typically clip or otherwise fasten in - it's pretty easy.

If you go to Newegg, they have OEM versions of Windows 7 much cheaper. There's verbiage on the box about "using the OEM preinstall kit" and such - don't worry about it. Put in the disk, let it run. (I've done this with my current system.)

7 Home Premium is fine for most folks. Pro is as high as I'd usually go. I don't tend to find much use for Ultimate - but even if you decide to pick up Ultimate, it's cheaper to go OEM packaging than to go with retail. (Example, newegg, Win7 Ultimate - Full package, $284, Upgrade, $194, OEM, $175.)

Only thing you lose is (a) a box (and even then, you have a regular-sized-and-shaped DVD case) and (b) support from Microsoft - though you still get patches, updates and service packs from them via windows update, as normal. (I don't think retail versions get exceptionally long support anyway before you start getting told to "check the newsgroups" or asked to pay money.)

Oh, and you do, with OEM, have to specify 64 bit if you want it (you do.) Retail comes with both 32 and 64 bit versions (two disks.)

Very simple. Here's one quick walkthrough. Actually, just google "how to build a PC," you'll find guides (admittedly of varying quality, some text, some video,) generally "if it doesnt' fit, make sure it's turned the right way. If it is and doesn't fit, it doesn't go there."

Haven't gone that route myself for some time - falcon northwest, alienware, etc. do it, but tend to be a bit spendy. Others mention cyberpower, ibuypower and the like.

/disagree. I love the set. As others have made many of the same counters I would have, I'll just say "The set not clicking with you does not make it "the worst primary" by a long shot.

Tutorials are one thing - but the starting tutorial (which I'm assuming they mean) (a) can't be too long, and (b) can't, and won't, cover everything. Especially when they have things that would be introduced later in the game. Why would they, for instance, cover "Most temp powers aren't refillable, the ones that are need to be used up first" when you don't run into that for quite some time? (And would someone remember it when they did?)

Regardless, even if they DID cover something about temp powers and refilling, a small reminder wouldn't hurt.

While I might not be the OP's biggest fan, I have to say these aren't exactly fair comments. A new user may *not* know this. And so many of the temp powers we get are *not* refillable (War Wolves, for instance - ok, barring Ouroboros for most.)

So, yes, a comment that "If you're going for a new set, you may want to use your old ones up" would not be out of line - nor would it be a lot of work to add a line or two of text. If someone ignored that line, well, that's completely their fault. (And yes, adding it to - say - jetpacks and such would not be out of line either.)

It's far easier to add a line or two of text than it would be to recode powers to "refill."

Actually, given the number of people playing at any one time, the number of mobs they'd be fighting (anything from +0 to +8, solo or teamed,) and going by dev statements, we'd probably hear more "OMG, why is this game suddenly so laggy all the time? It isn't this bad on a crowded Rikti invasion!" because of all the new processing the servers would have to do.

You're right. It's *not* shared. If your "role" is "jump into the middle, don't think, smash buttons," then yes, the role is (and should be!) squeezed out. Something makes you have to approach it a bit differently? GREAT!

Fortunately the only reason you need to get anyone else is to have a team, not because they're a certain AT or powerset.
"Rely heavily on stealth? Have to be careful about group selection?" No. You need to *pay attention to the enemy group and change your tactics as needed.* That might mean "Open with a hold instead of a blast" (such as my Electric/ or Ice/ blasters versus Malta.) Or "Pull instead of just running in and standing in the middle of the hall. Or "Don't aim into a wall, use knockback to keep X enemy out of the fight while I deal with his friends."

Really? It doesn't sound like you want a challenge at all, to be blunt, or do anything different. The devs have put in groups that force you to stop and say "Wait, what I do 90% of the time isn't a good idea here, how should I approach it," and those are the very encounters you're complaining about. You know, the ones that might... oh... pose a challenge.

The GDN took place years ago, as did ED. The day of "I'm going to stand in the middle of the map full of enemies and never be touched, nothing can ever harm me" are, thankfully, *over.* Most people have adjusted. It sounds, honestly, like you still need to. Adjusting your playstyle - to groups, to AT, what have you - is not a weakness or something to be ashamed of.