RemianenI

Hate to break it to you Kitteh, but the first wave of Kinetic Melee & Electric Control 50s will be minted well before September. In fact, I'm fairly sure there will be a "wave" of them by the end of the day on the 22nd. Just sayin', the demand for "level 50 stuff" for these characters will be almost immediate. The people who will be looking in September are probably largely composed of people who can't afford that stuff now (and probably won't be able to afford it then either) so they really don't count. That is, if we're talking about people buying and not 'wishing and whining'.

It's going to take over a month for the pent up demand from redside to be satisfied. It won't be instantaneous like some think because there are a lot of players out there who are, tact tact tact, slow on the uptake, so to speak. They won't "get it" until they see it and by then, it'll be too late to act.

It might be best to look over the market redside and find those recipes that are scarce but highly desired and stock up on those. Last time I counted, there were over 30 of 'em (even confuses will tend to move).

Wow, I don't think Gavin is the unusual one here.

You don't like BP, who are like wheat before a combine harvester to most characters, but you "kinda dig CoT"? That's like "I hate Council/Freakshow but I kinda dig Malta/Knives".

I think which is better (merits or AE) will largely depend on your playtime. Goat's method is sound for those with very limited playtime while those with more can really make headway with merits. I always use a 4 to 1 ratio to determine which to do on any given play session. Meaning, if I can do 4 (or more) TFs, I'll go with merits. Otherwise, it's tickets.

Frosticus, you and people who hold the same opinion are making some very strong assumptions about the so-called "new player" (in fact, those assumptions are similar to the ones made about the mythical "casual player"). You're assuming that new players to this game have never played another MMO in their lives. You're assuming that new players to this game have done no research or reading about this game. You're also assuming that new players to this game WANT to be surrounded by a bunch of people they don't know, all up in their faces with their often inane and banal chattering, while they're trying to learn the basics of how to play this game.

I've turned many people on to MMOs, people who are new to the genre overall (who had never played one in their lives). Not a single one of them fits into your 'new player box'. No one in my WoW or EQ guilds that I've told about CoX has been like that either. The new players I know of tend to read up on a game to see if they like it before committing to playing it. Their playtime is precious to them so they're not going to jump into a game, sight unseen, and run the risk of wasting said playtime. They prefer to try to learn basic gameplay before they shackle themselves to other people (often before they even tell me they're playing). You seem to portray new players as whimsical idiots who act on their first impulse. Perhaps the new players you know or have known have colored your view in that manner, I don't know.

Actually no. The majority of what you're seeing here is "variety is the spice of life" and "different strokes for different folks". Of course, you're not actually seeing that because it's not what you want to see. I was born and raised in New York City and live here now. I'm quite familiar with crowds and I'm comfortable in that environment. But I'm also familiar with less crowded places (like Bonaire, for example) and enjoy that too. Likewise, I have many characters on Virtue but I also have a lot on Infinity (almost all my villains), Victory, and Guardian and enjoy playing there as well. You want everyone to be forced onto a Freedom/Virtue type of server and you're trying to use some specious "financial" argument to support it. BZZT, wrong answer. Servers paid for themselves five years ago. Upgrades paid for themselves within six months. My two accounts (and the four others I pay for) would evaporate if the only choice I had was Freedumb, Virtue, and Freedumb Clone 1, 2, and 3.

You want a solution the devs can use to prevent making waves? Maintain the status quo and offer promotional periods of free server transfers a few times a year (perhaps the week leading into and following a double xp weekend). Even as an independent event, it's marketable and would possibly work even better if combined with a free reactivation weekend.

Might want to do some research before saying it. Though I'm sure designing one MMO from scratch TWICE didn't cost much money. Or were you not aware of the fantasy based Tabula Rasa? Seriously, anyone trying to use Tabula Rasa as some kind of justification for ANYTHING other than "get it right the first time" is going to look really ignorant.

I've seen that. I've also seen someone do that when begging for buffs in the Guild Lobby in EQ on Maelin Starpyre (read: arguably the most populated server in the game) with 138 people in zone. 138 people in a space that is a major gathering area and only about twice the size of an Icon store (so we're not talking about an Atlas Park sized area. That's 100+ people in your viewable range). I guess that means it's "empty" too?

Yes, because we all know how AWESOME hunt missions are.

Again, I'm not getting where people are coming up with this 'new players are lobotomized pigeons' view from. About the only game I'd agree that emptiness might work as a detriment, is EVE. But in that game, you don't want a lot of people around you either (in case one of them decides to shoot or suicide gank or canflip you). Many new people prefer to learn on their own, at their own pace, to prevent being the moron using Hurricane indiscriminately or the like. Sure there are others who don't care but there's the key point: they're not going to be decent team or community members anyway, because they don't care.

Funny. I always long to play my Brutes after doing a mission with a tanker and finding myself saying, "If I was on a brute, I'd be halfway through the NEXT mission by now." But then, I tend to like an aggressive pace and I look at things a bit differently than most. I only need to be tough enough to survive the current engagement. Anything more than that is largely wasted. On the flip side, being overwhelmingly tough with piss poor offense is too slow for me. It's like digging a trench with a teaspoon. I'd rather have a backhoe or a spade at the very least.

Same here. I'd take a brute over a tanker any day of the week and fifteen times on Sunday, when putting a group together. You can never have too much offense and when stuff is being vaporized, the traditional tanker method slows things down too much.

My Brutes, without exception, are damage dealers.

Actually, no. I've seen this more than a few times (in the 35ish range) but given what I was hoping for and what I got.....well, flushing this one was a no brainer.

Exactly. But the prospective buyers don't want to "waste" a slot with an outstanding bid and few people are philanthropic enough to post something that won't sell so you get this problem.

StoneJaguar, post your bid for it across the range you want and let it ride. Many newer marketeers aren't willing to tie up a slot for an item with no bids outstanding. The Field of Dreams approach doesn't tend to work with low demand sets like Confuse.

I devise challenges for myself and spend time overcoming those challenges. Easier to do that with two accounts than with one (for me, at least) since it's often more challenging to play two characters to their fullest potential than it is with just one. To this day, I've played one MMO for 11 years (shouldn't take too long to figure out which) and I always have fun when I log in because I always have an idea of what I want to do that play session.

Low level hero content blows. Villain stuff isn't a whole lot better but it is better, in my view. If villains had a sewers equivalent, it would be even better (as that's the only really good low level hero content, in my opinion). I also have personal AE arcs I use sometimes to get new characters through the boring (pre-22) levels but that's relatively rare. AE missions can help since they often offer the kind of variety that the base game simply can't.

Well, I have a very different view of what 'MMORPG' means (meaning, I don't believe it means 'you MUST have a bunch of people you don't know and/or don't like all up in your grill at all times you're logged in or you are wrong'). Socialization can occur in many different ways, whether it's through teaming, global channel activity, or even something as simple as Ventrilo/TeamSpeak/Mumble (with people who aren't even playing the same game!), it's all good. To that end, I team when I feel like it and duo (with myself) when I feel like it or just run solo...when I feel like it. When I'm bored here, I log off and play something else.

I've never had problems with this kinda thing in any MMO. Part of it comes down to thinking outside of the proverbial box. There's always more than one way to progress, even if it seems like there isn't.

I can agree with this sentiment. It's very similar to the casual-hardcore thing. Some people are more focused on the subtleties that produce superior results while others fixate on the obvious (green numbers = good!) even though it's less....well, efficient. I've quit teams summarily when the leader insists on waiting to "get a healer". It's a waste of time IMO. This game isn't that serious. It's not like radio teams are taking on mobs that can half round a tank (one shot, one kill) as happens regularly in other games.

I dunno, this seems to fit perfectly. If the objective is to get xp and not waste time standing around with your thumb up your butt (as good as that might feel to some - I'm not judging), team leaders who insist on this (and group members who tolerate it) are failing miserably at that goal.

Personally, I agree with your last sentence. I'm content to let those folks continue to use their faces to chase 100mph fastballs. Natural selection and all that.

This is only a dead horse because some presumptive types like to try to force their value systems on others. I enjoy story AND rewards but in MA (especially nowadays with the stopgap in place), sometimes those goals can be mutually exclusive.

There are some arcs that I've done well over 100 times (a few of Wrong Number's arcs for example and Bubbawheat's DC arc as well) with both accounts. I enjoy their story and I like (or 'can tolerate') their rewards. If that's bannable, I'm surprised my accounts are still active.

Honestly, I think the reason it was taboo in EQ had more to do with the spam ("Soandso is inspecting you") than courtesy. If you walked into a heavily populated area (GFay, East Commons, North Freeport on some servers) wearing something that even LOOKED like a popular/high end item (Executioner's Axe, Rubicite anything, Lustrous Russet anything, Short Sword of the Ykesha, etc), your chat box would fill with spam ("Soandso is inspecting you", "Suchandsuch is inspecting you", "Tomdickandharry is inspecting you"). And I remember several occurrences where people were turned down for teams (and ridiculed) for camps like AoF in Cazic Thule (when there was often a line to get into a group doing AoF room) and some of the better camps in Lower Guk (Frenzied Ghoul, Lord/AM, etc). There were even some cases of mistaken identity with regard to gear.

"Dude, I think the tank is wearing banded."
"No way!"
"Hey tank, is that a banded BP?"
"No, it's Brigandine."
"Can you put it in the trade window?" (because there was no linking back then)
"Sure."

While you're right that courtesy was more apparent then than it appears to be now, I don't think the reasons behind that are as similar as you seem to. Back then, if your rep went bad, you had one choice: reroll. Considering the time and effort it took to level back then, that was NOT what most people wanted to do. So people were courteous because they HAD to be or their day to day gameplay would be affected. That doesn't exist anymore (and hasn't for almost a decade. Kunark started the process of stripping that away from EQ1. The so-called "Kunark Express" meant rerolling wasn't quite so bad anymore).

On topic, people go for all six of a set for the reasons Memphis Bill stated. I do it myself because there are set bonuses in the sixth slot that I value higher than people at large.

Yeah, you do that. I'm sure BP is open to any and all suggestions, no matter how unfounded.

"Hey boss, we got some guy in Detroit saying we should just stick a rag innit."

I don't get upset about Comic Sans. I just delete any email I get that uses it.

What's funny is, I've heard the same thing said by someone who had similar difficulties playing on a low pop server (Fenris) of a game that is by no means 'not so popular anymore' (you know which one I'm referring to). Your difficulty does not denote anything but your own difficulty. Anyone can tell you teams are probably plentiful all day and night on Virtue and Freedom. Not so much on Protector or Victory, for example.

Adeon's suggestion is an astute one. Another thing to do is keep track of people you see/team with around the same time of day frequently. It might be they're regularly on at around that time (they might be Euro or work "odd" times) and team with them a lot. If your idea of 'popular' (game wise) is 'I can find a team with the most passive methods imaginable', you need to be on Virtue or Freedom. Perhaps you don't like forming your own team or running from zone to zone to broadcast 'lft'. If that's the case, you need to be on Virtue or Freedom. High pop servers (in all MMOs, by and large, though I suppose someone can point out an exception) offer a wider selection of socialization opportunities (of which teaming is the big one) but you often pay for that with overactive public channels ("spam", in other words).

I'd say the best way to level up would be to always get xp as much as you possibly can. That doesn't necessitate teaming but teaming is generally the path of least resistance (so the defacto 'best' to many people).

Add me to this list. I value soloability very highly so I can't really use the 'sucks solo, good on teams' justification with regard to theme builds. I do have a handful of characters created to shine in a teaming environment but in every one of those cases, the team.....is me (meaning, the characters were created specifically to support/team with existing characters on the other account). My themes/concepts are never created outside of the game's functionality as that just leads to frustration. Also, nowadays there are some concepts I have that work better in the other superhero game than here so creating that character here is a waste of a slot (because I'll be compromising at every turn when I really don't have to).

I've found, at least for me, malleable concepts that work within the confines of the game suit me better than 'drawn up on paper' and not considering the strengths and weaknesses of the game/game systems.

Battleguard, it's probably not a good idea to have a mission objective target that is set as an AV to run. At least not for your very first arc. Until you get the mechanics down, it's probably going to cause more frustration than fun unless you specifically note that your arc is meant for teams. Solo control ATs might have serious issues due to PToD and having no way to stop the AV class mob from running, it becomes an automatic fail....at the end of a fight they've spent a good bit of time on already.

Just a bit of advice, before the possible 1-stars (with their occasional accompanying comments) start coming in. I'm running the arc now but knowing that the AV is going to bail and that I have no way of preventing that with this character (41 elec/elec brute) is a bit of a downer. It's not likely I'll 2-shot her, after all.

I don't think this assumption is as safe as you believe it is. Personally, I'm not willing to essentially "pay" 60% of my potential rewards for something as dubious (and RARE) as a good story. I've done well over a thousand different arcs (not including farms, old broken arcs, and the ones I tend to repeat often) and of those, by my own count, 116 had what I would consider to be good stories. Few people I know or play with are willing to concede over half their potential rewards for the promise of a story.

So you're advocating everyone gut the rewards in their arcs because you suck and can't handle customs worth more than 40%? I don't think I can agree with that. I believe arcs should be designed around the author's story, with little to no consideration given to reward levels. Even if an author did consider challenge or reward level, I don't think they should balance toward players that "suck".

Build tougher characters. I'd never say "team more" because I sure as heck don't and I don't believe that to be some kind of miracle cure to all ills (it can often be quite the opposite).

Come on Rigel, you're no newbie. You know good and well that you pretty much have to be afk with Rest on to die in +0 radio missions. Using that as a comparison is largely invalid unless you're trying to compare reward rates. You're doing the exact opposite, I think, since it's obvious that cutting your arc's reward output to 40% of "normal" content is trying to duplicate the "normal" content's difficulty level (that being, nonexistent) at the expense of the reward end of the scale. Few people are going to think that's a good deal.

I see your point and what you're getting at though. Like Eva, I tend to only do AE with my strongest characters (one of which is a D3 btw, so using defenders as some kind of pansy proxy isn't always a good fit), but I don't think the defacto difficulty standard should be set by the community. It should be set by the person creating the arc, with no outside noise distorting their vision (such as it is). While I automatically skip all 1-54 arcs on all characters that aren't 41+ due to my experiences with them, I agree with Coulomb2 that it's mainly laziness on the part of the author since that level range is notorious for overpowered customs. If those types of arcs are the ones you're referring to, I think the problem lies with the author, not with the system itself (which has more than enough warts on its own).

I'd love an indicator in the summary as to what percentage range the arc falls in though.

Yeah, I'm chickensh...well, somewhat risk averse let's say so I only made 88 million off the wings (I wasn't convinced the cliché would be nearly as commonplace as it turned out to be. My bad!) but that would happen come August. The above is absolutely true.

Abigail, as Talen alluded to, you (and Megajoule) are not nearly as active, vehement, confrontational, judgmental, or fanatical as the person being referred to. That person has become the defacto spokeperson for the RP community, if only due to his/her/its fervor and presence in nearly every discussion of this type. It's not right, but it's how things tend to happen.

This is an obviously positive development and even the negatives aren't really negative (they're choices people make that put them in that situation).

Honestly, this and Venture's suggestion has been made many times before. It's pretty much in 'no brainer' territory. The fact that it hasn't even been explored as a solution tells me there's something going on behind the scenes preventing it. Whether it's schedules that are too tight (including coder time coming at an extreme premium) or something more appearance oriented (ala 'Over 2 million stories have been created using our mission architect system', ignoring the fact that only about 40,000 of those arcs are playable or worth playing mechanically. Marketing fodder, basically). Problem is, the feature is being choked to death on fecal matter (so to speak) and the only thing that seems to happen regularly are band aid fixes that don't really fix anything.

I can only hope that someone with a modicum of authority grows fed up with the feature limping along and drawing developer resources with constant band aids and actually green lights a freshening (and cleaning) up of the system. Especially since right now, the arcs created for legitimate storytelling purposes are gutted in many cases (forcing authors to change/revamp stories to account for the system's newest stopgap deficiencies) while the latest farm du jour, which the devs have repeatedly tried to stamp out (and repeatedly failed miserably) is still going strong. I don't have anything against farms (my personal missions are all farms, made from stock mobs chosen to fit my primary characters' strengths), it's the exploits that annoy me (and no, the two terms aren't synonymous) due to the Jack Emmert-esque reactions they cause with this team.

No you're not. Your two posts clearly show that.

The same conditions exist here. You can be 'decent' on SOs. You can be 'good' on generic IOs. You can have money (hundreds of millions even) without slaving over anything. But you don't want champagne, you want sex. And there's no sex, in the champagne room. (Translation: You don't want to be 'good', you want to be 'great' but without any significant effort and it doesn't work like that.)

Um, that's only if you're spending most of your time playing with 'hardcore' players. Why would you? Unless you're the token casual in a group/SG/VG that is primarily hardcore, that is. The people with the builds you're talking about aren't running base radio missions in PUGs! They're running +1 or 2/x8 missions solo or duo or other types of things that seriously challenge a character with that increased capability.

Much like many people look in the window of a Ferrari or Bentley or Bugatti dealership saying the same thing. It's only true because they make it true. If you don't want to do what's necessary to "earn" those things, you shouldn't have them.

So wait, the game's difficulty was not changed at all when the invention system was introduced. This means that if you don't feel superheroic now, you didn't feel superheroic then. Sounds like a deeper problem that simply "I can't have that so the game is broken!".

Let me illustrate something for you, real quick. I have characters who net 2.1 to 5.5 million a day. None of them is over level 28. My characters over 30 do significantly better than that. Do I farm? Not regularly. Do I spend countless hours at WW/BM? Nope. I play the game, I sell what I get from drops that isn't useful to me (or any of my other characters now with email), and stash the stuff I can use on some character. I also put up a full slate of bids on a variety of things that often fill either while I'm playing or by the next time I log that character in. In the last month, I've gotten six purples (four of them on a level 38 blaster) and none of them have been particularly valuable (holds and confuses) but they made me a nice chunk o' change. Except for the blight that is temp power drops (the vast majority of which aren't worth wiping your butt with), I haven't gotten very many top shelf drops at all this month. But I don't need to since I far outearn any of my expenses.

Here's some advice (and what I do). I start with sets on most of my characters at enhancement level 30 (so character level 27). I use the same sets, by and large, in similar powers and get the same set bonuses. I've even splurged on the really big ticket sets on a few occasions (like the Obliteration set the aforementioned 38 blaster has). But most of the time, it's the same sets used. Granted, a few of those sets saw their value skyrocket since I initially stocked up on them (Thunderstrike, Detonation, etc) but all I do is set my bids on ONE character (usually a 50) and as they get filled, I make the enhancement and stash it in the base. So when the next character hits 27 (on any of my servers now, thanks to email), they get their sets. That's a luxury but one that is easily attainable. It just requires patience (which might make it unattainable for many). This isn't news. Heck, I think it was Fulmens (or StarGeek or UberGuy) who pointed this out YEARS ago (like, when I9/I10 were new and shiny).

It's all attainable and it doesn't require much time spent putting together a 'good' or 'great' build. They're posted everywhere CoH has a presence. Here on this board (in the various AT forums) as well as several fansite communities. If you want one of the top dollar "I can solo AVs with a Dominator" builds, those will require time, effort, and yes, hard freakin' work. But they're all doable. Remember, the invention system wasn't meant to be an instant gratification measure. It was designed to give players something to shoot for. Purples were designed to give 50s something to shoot for (something they didn't have previously). If you want it, you can have it. It's just going to take time. How much real time is up to you (a farmer who plays 12 hours a day is most likely going to reach the goal a lot faster than someone who plays 3 hours a week, after all).

No.

You answered yourself here. Look, I'm gonna give you a few free words of advice (and I do get paid for counseling): don't ever do anything you don't want to do, especially not in a game you presumably pay for. Bottom line is, this is YOUR game to play as YOU see fit. Until someone is paying your subscription for you, they get zero say in how you choose to play (within the established rules of the ToS). When you pay the cost, you are the boss. This goes for every MMO you will ever think to play. If people tell you to roll a cleric/priest/support class when you don't like playing support and would rather be DPS, you tell them to go scratch their backs with a chainsaw as you roll a DPS class.

If what they're saying is true that you can't be a good player without this one power, that means the game is designed badly and you shouldn't play it. Luckily, that's not true with this game so what they say is patently false.

I have taunt on a few of my tankers and my 50 brute took it at 49 (because it was the only power I could think of to take) but on her next respec, it's gone. I'd rather take Stun or a second travel power (it's bound to be more universally useful). I typically take taunt on my tankers in the early levels and often drop it when I respec in the 30s. But then, my tanks are built to be self-sufficient, not beholden to teams (much like most of my other characters).

Actually, path of least resistance does tend to retard a player's overall growth. You can't learn about the whole game when you're firmly entrenched in one small part of it. Or have the so-called AE Babies been totally forgotten?

Heroside this is true. Red side, I'm not so sure.

One instance I remember is when I was playing one of my defenders at level 30 and a teammate asked me where I got "all those badges" like Negotiator and Spelunker and Pwnz and Spirit Warrior and Redeemer and such (Accomplishment badges, basically). I told him I got them doing missions. He said he's never gotten badges for doing missions, outside of AE. Then I found out his usual character strategy involves doing sewers then radio missions, to the exclusion of all else (no TFs, no trials, no contact missions, just sewers and radios). I would chalk that up to ignorance, not stupidity though.

Until the 'big guys' buy them. Or do you think EA got as large as it is through organic growth?

CoH's graphics look dated....because they are. They were done what, in 2000/2001, on an engine that was made or current in that time period? Ultra Mode in the CoH/CoV areas is like putting MAC lipstick on a pig. It doesn't make the old, dated graphics look 'cutting edge', it just adds details (that are largely superfluous). Ultra Mode doesn't give you detailed character models that are 'present day' quality (quick! What color are your characters' eyes? How many fingers does your character have?), it sharpens what has always existed. I'm an enthusiast (with a couple of rigs that cost obscene amounts) so graphics are important to me and hardware requirements don't bother me one bit. But the assertion that Ultra Mode did anything but slightly freshen up the existing areas in CoH/V (we're not talking GR areas that were built on Ultra Mode) to me is misguided.

Story is important but so is presentation. You must have one or the other and preferably (but rarely) both. If the former is most important, then, as you mentioned, Zork is still out there. If graphics are a much lesser consideration than story, the Ultima series still exists as well.

How so? Is every villain a blind and stupid individual who trusts anyone who says they're a friend? Does every villain give perfect strangers access to their stash?

Honestly, that's not saying much. When the previous dialogue options were 'accept this mission' and 'talk about something else', adding a new dialogue option or two isn't revolutionary (it's evolutionary, as it should be).

And yet, there are still tons of assumptions made about characters that don't necessarily add up (villains are stupid (or the Joe Mauer of the Idiot Ball), heroes are sickeningly selfless, etc)

Dealing with a clone is one thing. Turning my streetwise, heavy in the game character into a mark with completely uncharacteristic choices, is a whole other ball o' wax.

Seriously. You cop a cloning lab. Just jacked it by force. Some dude you don't know from a can of paint says "Hey, we're this company you've never heard of and we can do security for you."....so you give them access to it?!? Just like that? "Okay!" (more like dee-dee-dee).

I would much prefer if it assumed my character isn't a moron.


As for the topic, it's a difficult balance in today's environment. From what I understand, it's more difficult (and expensive, which is the same thing in developer speak) to design a game around a story than vice versa. Many games (and especially MMO expansions) are designed first and the story is tacked on to fit it. The other way has the story as paramount and the game is designed around that story, which often means a slew of new assets (art, zones, etc) which tax a development budget.

The example that was given/shown to me was the Secrets of Faydwer expansion for EverQuest. The zones were largely created well before the expansion (along the time the Steamfont revamp was being done) and the assets were either already budgeted for previously (minotaurs, clockworks, etc) as part of that revamp or reskinned versions of existing models (much of Crystallos, the end zone) or just straight up renamed old models (goos, drakes, wind nymphs, brownies, etc). The story was then created to fit what they already had (and Kerafyrm's return was decided years prior).

Single player games have the edge, because their designers control the main character. But games with good to great stories (see the aforementioned Mass Effect, Dragon Age, maybe (MAYBE) the Elder Scrolls from Daggerfall on forward) cost lots if they're done right. Or, they take a lot of time from conception to release (which is six of one, half a dozen of the other, really).

1) 15-25% of the time (with 25% being an extreme rarity). I solo lots and tend to only group with global friends unless I'm in an unusually patient mood (rare).

2) Probably 60% of the time.

3) The bare necessities? Most of the time. What would be best for efficiency? Rarely.

4) Never. I let the group leader do that. If I'm group leader, it's not a PuG so I'd just say 'Stop screwin' around already'.

5) Happens now and then. Maybe once a month or so.

6) About 1 in 5 groups has a Spongebob Loserpants.

I would venture a guess and say 'then the entire industry is wrong along with him/her'. That is, unless you think there's a magic release that Mythic can produce that would automagically make DAoC as popular (or more popular) than it was say, 6 years or so ago (or rather, just prior to Trials of Atlantis). I'm sure SOE would pay you big dollars if you could tell them of something they could do to give their flaccid flagship a rebirth of sorts.