Sailboat

It's worth noting that they never give a firm date for this sort of thing, and they'd be certifiably crazy to do so. For the future, the answer is always "we don't know" to specific requests to predict firm dates.

If you run Quaterfield Task Forces back-to-back, this restriction won't really be a problem.

One thing no one has mentioned yet is that Fire is less rugged than other primaries by design, because it has more offense. It's supposed to be weaker defensively, to create a different way to play and a wider range of options, exactly like a Granite tanker is stronger defensively at the cost of mobility and damage, and for the same reason.

It's not supposed to be weaker overall, necessarily, just less rugged in exchange for more offense.

The new Shields powerset may be a little outside the formula of losing ruggedness to gain its offense, I am not sure. And the Burn nerf certainly changed Fire's offense a lot.

But generally that was the expectation when the original sets were released. Fire might not be the indestructible set, but it was the butt-kicking set -- lots more damage output.

Nothing wrong with being the butt-kicker.

IMHO the answer is to pick ATs that have great strength in one are and simplyu regard any weaknesses as inherent. A Granite Tanker is a good example -- you can use IOs to offset his run speed and recharge penalties somewhat, but you can also just regard them as part of the character, and frankly even yellow SOs will result in a massively tough Granite Tanker.

Also one of the good controller combos like Earth/Rad -- tons of flexibility and power even without IOs. No glaring weakness IOs can fix, either.

If someone hasn't made an *** of himself/herself, but I can't get any response for a while, I will sometimes kick with a /tell saying "Had to kick you, send /tell if you return and we'll reinvite."

I do tend to wait longer than 30 seconds. But I figure they can't get mad with a tell like that. If they reply a long time later and I've filled their spot, they get a pro forma apology, but honestly, anyone ought to be able to understand that.

This idea existed before COH was conceived. When COH was created, it was rejected. It's been re-suggested regularly through the years, and, so far, continues to be ignored by the Devs.

I think it's a good idea. I mean, it would make me personally very unhappy, and it would make most of the people I've talked to about it very unhappy, and it would make the Devs very unhappy, and it would punish the most creative and imaginative folks among us.

But it would reward the unimaginative, the fixated, and the simpleminded, and that's the important thing.

Yeah, my money's on TonyV's interpretation, based on seeing similar copycat counter-complaints in every forum I've participated in on the Internet. It's a pretty standard ploy that, to be brutally honest, I've used myself, although I was not implying a real incident, but a what-if, and trying to be funny.

Frankly I am unhappy to hear about any "improvements" to 50s. One of the very best things about this game is that you can realistically get a character to 50 and kit him/her out the way you want and be finished. I like finished characters, and I like unfinished characters before they become finished -- I'll make an alt to experience that.

Also, the stronger 50s thing is a trap. At 50, we're already too strong for a lot of the content, and even moreso if we use invention sets. The only way to challenge us with new content is to make it drastically harder, which will, at a stroke, render all current 50s "weak" until they gear up with the new "improvements." So no matter how the devs approach it, making such a change will feel like nerfing established, mature superheroes, who used to be the world's best.

The people they seek to please -- particularly here I refer to the vocal folks who have one 50 and don't want to make alts, but want to keep progressing -- will rapidly finish the new content...and be back in the same boat. They will quit anyway, so retention through moving the goalposts in this fashion is an illusion.

The Devs may yet pleasantly surprise me -- they've done so many times before -- but I have dark forebodings about this proposed change, so far.

Well, you can't enhance resistance debuffs. There are no IOs, no SOs, no DOs, no Training enhancements that let you do it. Therefore, no set exists for a property you cannot enhance.

As to why you cannot enhance it, well, ya got me. It would be unbalancingly powerful if they let you increase it more than it currently is; but in theory they could nerf these powers and then let you enhance back up to the original value. The net result would be you could reach the same amount of res debuff you now have, but you'd spend slots to do it.

In that case, you'd be worse off than you are now. And frankly I don't see how they could significantly increase res debuff strengths without redesigning pretty much everything we fight...even a few res debuffs already drastically speed up combats.

The wiki shows some unlockable custom shield looks called "Spartan" (at the bottom of the row of pictures). The text doesn't specifically mention "Spartan" by name -- are these unlocked via the Roman and/or Centurion badges like the Roman shields, or by something unmentioned, or are they unavailable?

Also, can one put emblems on them (assuming they exist)?

Thanks!

Well, there's also potential confusion about animation times. Powers with short recharges are called "fast" even if they have long, ponderous animations. If I were writing it, I'd call a short-recharge power "frequent" or "quickly available" and reserve slow/fast descriptors for animation times.

This thread might shed some light, especially the answers from Muon Neutrino.

If they did have sets, I would fervently hope one was named Purple Triangles of Doom.