Rubberlad

I love Shakespeare's Othello so I was happily surprised that War Witch came up with Desdemona.

I guess she's a fan of the play too?

[ QUOTE ]
play money rains down from the sky in this game- all anyone needs to do to become filthy, stinking outrageously disgustingly rich is hold out their hands to collect some of the downpour...





...I kinda like the current price madness- it makes the stuff you want worth going after again, instead of casually picking stuff up at BUY IT NAO prices just because you can.

[/ QUOTE ]

For a minute there, I thought you were talking about Monopoly... which prompts me to ask:

What's the player's ultimate goal in City of Heroes nowadays: to make money or play a superhero/villain?

[ QUOTE ]
There needs to be more incentive to do things outside of AE content.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sad but true. I think a couple problems could be solved if the MA missions in each zone were level restrictive (ie, you can't go to AP to play a lvl 45-50 mish - you'll have to go to Peregrine Island for that one).

That however would require enforcing players to "choose" a level range when they create missions (and once participants have outleveled the mission's set range, they will auto-exemp down for cash upon further repeats).


Probably a bad idea though. Ah well.

We're buying it the minute it becomes available. The Devs continue to do a great job with these booster packs and I'm glad to say every one we've bought was worth the money.

Really great stuff. Please keep it up!

[ QUOTE ]
OMG you may actually have to work and save for something! This cannot continue.

The next thing you know similar things will start to happen in real life. I mean you won't be able to get that Farrari for $10k or a beach side mansion for 50k if stuff like this gets out. Everyone should just have the same amount of stuff no matter if they are a cashier at McDonalds or a CEO of a multi billion dollar company. It's just not fair.

end /e sarcasam

[/ QUOTE ]

*frown* Now that's just mean.

[ QUOTE ]
Based on how many you've said you've found... you're NOT a casual player at all... or you're OBSCENELY lucky. You know how many purples I've gotten? 3. THREE. And I've done loads of Task Forces, and many farms.

[/ QUOTE ]

Scout's honor: I play maybe once every two weeks now (that's not by choice either; I've had a 4hr daily work commute for the last 4 months - the result of taking a new job in a hurry after both hubby and I got laid off from our jobs within 2 weeks of each other - and both on our birthdays! You just go ahead and work out those crazy statistics! Oh the things we do to get by and survive nowadays...).

A year ago, I probably played for 2-3 nights a week but I only ran TF's on the weekends (about 1-2/month).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


True, but........

[/ QUOTE ]
There is no 'but'.


Make up all the fairy stories you want.
But the market is ruled by supply and demand, not your wishful thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm talking to a nethergoat...

You should be the last person on earth to lecture me about wishful thinking, lol.

[ QUOTE ]
You have found 9 since May 1st 2007. That is 805 days. That's one every 90 days or roughly one every 3 months.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but I'm a *casual* player....

Imagine how much more the hardcore TF farmer is earning and turning around for profit at market day after day, week after week, month after month... Given the volume of TF farmers operating on any given day in this game, there's always going to be purple recipes/IO's available at market as a result. All the more reason the pricing should go down...


*edit*

If there were absolutely zero purples available at market on any given, then I would say paying millions or even billions for an ultra rare for the rare times one would actually crop up at auction would be worth it.

As it stands now, there's plenty of purples in market inventory to be had - the asking prices for them however is inconsistent with their true value as "ultra rare" items.

But again, that's IMHO...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If TF farmers insist on putting the extra time in to loot ultra rare items (not that anybody asked them to do so), then of course they should be compensated appropriately. But when we start talking about spending "millions" or even "billions" of inf. for an ultra rare item...

[/ QUOTE ]Okay, answer this question: How much should the ULTRA RAREST and MOST POWERFUL loot in this game go for? Remember, this is called "ultra rare"... not just rare but ultra!

Give me a number, now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Minimum? 5 million.
Tops? 20 million tops.

Any more, and I think the asking price is unreasonable (but again that's my own perception - others may disagree). And I say that because there are a lot of semi-rare lvl 50 recipes and IOs that have devalued to the point that they're not worth much more than 50k minimum to 2 million maximum.

That's why its hard for me to justify a huge jump in pricing from roughly 2 million to 280 million - or higher... That's why I say purples should start at 5 million. Its all a matter of perspective and competitive pricing.

I'm sure the Devs have better statistics than I regarding abnormal pricing fluctuations but I'd rather they work on I16 and GR than humor me on a hypothetical argument.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you understand the words "reasonable" and "rationale".

How many purples have you ever found? I don't think you have a grasp on how few of these drop in the game and how long it takes one to obtain a Purple recipe. The price reflects this rarity.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since they were first introduced to the live servers? 9.

In the last year? 2. But I've not done a lot of TF's recently.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Ok, let's stop it there a sec and clear something up:

"Ultra rare" items are fine.
Hysterical pricing of "ultra rare" items is not fine.

[/ QUOTE ]
You can't have one without the other.

Unless you go to some kind of WoW system of soulbound stuff and bind on pickup etc etc.

If the item is saleable, and people want it, and it's 'ultra rare'......the price will reflect that.

Your wishful thinking has exactly zero impact on the implacable law of supply and demand.

[/ QUOTE ]


True, but I'm not talking about *just* supply and demand. I'm also considering want vs. need (which constitute "demand"). The difference between the two is a measure of addiction (which directly influences demand) and it has potential to both help *and* hinder the in-game economy.

Let's put it this way: what's the difference between a consumer (casual player) and a junkie (hardcore gamer)? Yes, I know, apples to oranges, but when you get right down to it - what makes the casual player put less into it than the hardcore gamer?

Addiction... and that's what indirectly drives the pricing to fluctuate.

In the absence of any new content, some players became addicted to farming - regardless of supply and demand. The prices we're seeing now aren't reasonable - or even rationale.

They're hysterical - and they're driven by addiction.

[ QUOTE ]
Aura_Familia wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
Purples ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ULTRA RARE.

What of this statement that has been confirmed by the devs do folks not get?

[/ QUOTE ]

You'd be surprised what a sense of entitlement can help you ignore.

--NT

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, let's stop it there a sec and clear something up:

"Ultra rare" items are fine.
Hysterical pricing of "ultra rare" items is not fine.

Yeah, the TF farmer puts in extra time to earn these drops but a casual player has as much right and opportunity as a hardcore TF farmer to earn a rare purple drop and strike "auction house gold" even if they only run a TF once (I had it happen a couple of times during the few times I've run TF's in the past year) -- so let's stop slinging these back-handed "entitlement" persnicketies starting now and try conversing like mature, rational adults.


Gang, I honestly can't tell you why it's insane to pay this much for *anything* in-game (either common or ultra rare) - but if you think its fine, great. If you don't, that's fine too. If TF farmers insist on putting the extra time in to loot ultra rare items (not that anybody asked them to do so), then of course they should be compensated appropriately. But when we start talking about spending "millions" or even "billions" of inf. for an ultra rare item...

Well, IMHO, that's just narrow-minded crazy talk.

Collecting ultra rares should not be the highest priority for playing this game. Hell, becoming a TF farmer should not be a high priority for playing this game - but it is.... and that priority evolved in the absence of new content and folks struggling to find something else to keep their time occupied.

Well, guess what: there's new content coming.

A lot of new and returning players are going to come back to COX when Going Rogue goes live - and they are not going to touch this in-game economy with a ten-foot pool if it keeps looking like this. But they will play around it - and they will trade around it if the new content is good enough - and eventually future supplies of ultra rare items are going to dwarf anything we're seeing now -

And prices will drop.


For this reason alone, try looking ahead to GR and see that there's absolutely no reason to pay 9-digit millions or even billions for an ultra rare item *right this second.* Farm all you want if that's how you want to pass your time, but try to keep the pricing realistic in the meanwhile.

That's all I'm saying - no harm done, no offense meant.

*post deleted*

[ QUOTE ]
The buyers as well as the sellers are responsible for high priced items.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're ignoring the "supplier" factor - who controls the availability of a product. As a result, they too are responsible for high-priced items.

In this game, the "supplier" is an NPC which means its beyond either the buyer or seller's ability to claim responsibility - and only the Devs can make a difference and they're not vested in the economy like a "for-profit supplier" would be (ie the supplier *wants* your money). This is where and how "the gouge" comes into play - long before the buyers and sellers start playing their own little "hording" games with each other.

The NPC supplier isn't 100% vested in profiting from the system its supplying for...

Incidentally, this is where the base storage nerf also failed. It regulated any and all "hording" opportunities for salvage, however it failed to deal with rare enhancements and/or recipes that are horded in base storage tables and auction house inventory slots.

The market system should force players to keep all "loot" products moving until they're utilized - either slot those puppies, trade 'em or sell 'em, but stop storing and stockpiling them indefinitely (less they be lost forever if/when a player account goes inactive or is outright cancelled).

You can have all the money you want (its only money after all; you can earn more) - but don't expect to get away with hording all the product (especially when there's limited supply...). I say if a 10-slot enhancement storage tray limit is good for toons, then there should be a 10-slot storage limit per toon on the auction house and in base storage units as well. One SG member should not be able to place 100 enhancements in a 100-limit storage table.

This may or may not resolve any "purple" pricing issues but it would help re-balance the rest of the market and put a more reasonable perspective on how players should value a "rare" item like a purple IO against more commonplace items.

[ QUOTE ]
3) Why is 280 mil outrageous? How much SHOULD a purple be? Another player said it should be 280 mil. Why should your opinion (OP) outweigh that player's?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said it does? Opinions don't carry weight with anyone...

That's the beauty of having an opinion - and using them to pose questions.

That said, almost always the concept of "balance" has been cited as a reason for changing anything in this game - but balanced for whom? Farmers? Casual players? Year one players? Or RP'ers?

So let me turn your question back on you: why should purples be exempt from the discussion of "balancing" issues? And what makes you think 280 million (or even a billion) inf. is worth paying for a purple?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Dev's are in a tough spot.

1 - Everyone loves to level. Related to that is the idea that L1-L20, especially the teens, can be quite boring/frustrating especially if you've done it before.
2 - They don't want to lose a whole crop of new paying customers.
3 - They don't want to lose many existing customers.
4 - They want the AE to be popular.
5 - They don't want the AE to dominate the game experience.

I don't know what they could do that would satisfy everyone. The speed of farm-leveling is way beyond anything any of us have ever thought possible, and that defines it as "not working as intended", therefore taking advantage of that to go from L1-50 in a day is by definition, an exploit. Of course, it's tough to tell someone what "fun" is supposed to be in a game.

The Dev's are in quite a pickle...

[/ QUOTE ]

They are, but the solution is to man up and do something like the following (these aren't the only things they could do, of course):

1) Force some standards on AE missions: i.e. missions must spawn like normal mission content. Custom groups must have at least one minion class mob, one lt. class mob and one boss class mob;

or

2) Nerf the rewards;

or

3) Set a minimum level to use AE or otherwise gate it;

or

4) Be absolutely ruthless in taking action on accounts that set up farming missions.


All of these will cause people to quit, will result in doom threads, etc. There are other solutions that are even worse. But really the devs have to get off the fence and decide what they want AE to be.

If they don't want it to be a farming tool, then they need to stop screwing around and fix the system. OR just let people farm and accept that their game experience will be a laughingstock.

[/ QUOTE ]

I said it before and I'll say it again.

The MA mission system should offer one set of exclusive rewards (ex. prestige).
The non-MA mission system should offer a completely different set of exclusive rewards (ex. xp).

As long as there's overlap, participants will always gravitate to the easier "attainment" system. A bunch of folks on my team this weekend discussed the pros/cons of each and most preferred not having to do zone runs when they can get the same rewards at a convenience in AP (and I agree with the original OP - it was a mistake to have lowbies/high levels co-exist in AP - an absolute quick fix would be to take the MA out of the lowbie zones completely and resituate them in "mid-level" zones that don't see a lot of traffic normally).

Personally, I like seeing the zones. War Witch and others put a lot of great effort into these common areas and they really add much-needed atmosphere that you just can't get from the MA mission room. Its a shame to overlook them completely in light of the MA buildings.

Seriously! That's what I saw this weekend in the auction house when I went looking for an Apocalypse IO and a few other purples to complete a set I'd begun slotting several months ago.

How is *anything* going for 200 million plus inf. on the auction house? Is the system that unbalanced now? There's just no way the casual player is ever going to afford a purple recipe now - or is that the idea?

*edit*

Deleted the $ sign - sorry about that!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Two-Tone Scientist Coat

[/ QUOTE ]
On the downside, the buttons aren't independently colorable now.

Color 1: Coat
Color 2: Inner section

The buttons take on both colors with outer "ring" being color 2, inner section being color 1.

Not bad and a nice addition, but it would be nice if we could have both versions: the old style and this new style.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm just grateful Sexy Jay took the time to make this addition at all. Much Love, SJ!

Has anything changed?

Sadly, I think I understand what Twixt was after...


Most of the replies I'm reading assume Twixt was "testing" the game's "technique" of being a PvP griefer when in fact he was "measuring" the community's social response to a hostile "virtual reality" setting (which he created using valid PvP techniques that "the system" allowed him to use).



That said, the academic results of Twixt's inquiries are false/skewed for three reasons:

1) Twixt failed to maintain objectivity because his testing focused solely on the negative social impact of a virtual reality setting. He deliberately excluded any positive social impact(s) observed/experienced in the same situation/environment.

2) Twixt did not test the entire equilibrium of "the system" (aka PvP environment) as a whole. Again, he focused exclusively on one negative aspect of the enitre system and excluded all other data - both postive and negative (including "what else" the system would have allowed him to do or what it "didn't" allow him to do).

3) Because the community didn't react as intended (either by "the system's" reckoning or to Twixt's own expectations), Twixt broke with the neutrality of the study and became part of his own testing environment by manufacturing an unbalanced "sub-system." Any social reactions recorded in these conditions occur as an unnatural reaction to Twixt himself rather than "the system" he originally set out to evaluate.



Ultimately, Twixt's conclusions are unreasonably biased because he failed to disassociate himself from the experiment and remain objective while trying to prove a theorem (ie., that society is losing its ability to distinguish "real life" from "virtual reality" and that, in the latter setting," the human mind "defaults" to antagonistic behaviors). By introducing himself as a self-appointed "chaos element" in the system, Twixt has transcended the role of being a neutral observer to becoming an active participant in his own experiment.

As a result, Twixt has proven his own inability to decipher "real life" from "virtual reality" and the published results of his academic experiment are neither true, objective, nor scientifically accurate.


And his PvP skills just [censored] suck.

Chances are we've got BAB and War Witch to thank for these little improvements. It certainly helps the game's NPCs feel more "in character" given each groups motivations/character traits.

[ QUOTE ]
That's an awesomely subtle way to try to get an approximate time line on the release of Going Rogue. I approve and would also like an answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly, I hadn't thought about it like that (so please don't spin my question in a way that wasn't intended). I was sincerely asking if anyone knew whether the Devs were forecasting the remaining booster packs for this year or would they spill over into next year.

Hate to tell you "soon" folks, but in the average business model, its more than appropriate to project your business goals up to 5 years out. I'm not interested in knowing the release date for GR; of course, it'd be nice to have all five booster packs available prior to GR's release date (whenever it is), but if its not on the cards, c'est la vie.


Y'all really take this [censored] way too literal sometimes.

[ QUOTE ]
I was really looking forward to a Radiation suit too ..

[/ QUOTE ]

If its anything like the one in Fallout 3, I'll buy two of 'em.

[ QUOTE ]
I gots $9.99 burning a hole in my pocket! Well, in my credit card account...

--NT

[/ QUOTE ]

You and me both. And its so worth the price tag based on what I saw last night in the Training Room. This one really tops the first two booster packs. Its extremely well done.

Has there been confirmation yet if all 5 Booster Packs will be available prior to Going Rogue hitting stores?