ScionofSatan

[ QUOTE ]
And four years later when your first patch goes live... well, at least you'll still be around to see your absolutely perfected, balanced, analyzed code that no-one can find fault with.


[/ QUOTE ]

If the only reason you're adding a patch is to add global nerfs or completley redesign your powersets, you've got bigger problems than how long it'll take you.

Go ahead and add new maps. New content. New powersets. The context of the comment you quoted was in reference to a global nerf. Taken in that context, it doesn't exactly follow that it'll take you four years to come up with patches holding new content and the like.

[ QUOTE ]
Of course, when you're running and MMP game, the *only* reliable way to gauge your users' requirements short of doing a full playerbase survey, is to trust the instincts of your Lead Designer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not entirely true. There are other ways. And sending out a mass e-mail survey to people about a proposed major change isn't really that tough. Include checkboxes and an auto tally bit of software back at your end, and you could probably poll the majority, if not the entirety, of the playerbase in relatively short order. Or you could datamine. Or you could check your attrition numbers, etc, etc...

But I get your point. It'll never be perfect. Still, there's a BIIIIG difference between four years for "perfectly designed" product and 2 weeks for a hugely unpopular nerf.

Just saying. There might be some middle ground in there, somewhere.

[ QUOTE ]
If this is the case, then the developers would now know better to inform players beforehand. Then again, what about all those players that left before even trying the changes? Not telling people would prevent these losses. Just a thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's like saying, "Well, when we wait till the ships half-sunk to launch the life boats, we lose 100 people to drowning. If we wait till it's AT the waterline, we won't lose so many." The proper answer is: When you are making a huge change to the live servers, one you've had planned and had lots and lots of time to "internally test", give the Players time to hammer on it for a while on test, do datamining, get feedback, consider suggestions, poll your users via e-mail, really shake it out. Then, AFTER people have seen what it will really DO to the game, do an analysis of your results, and discuss whether or not this is something you REALLY need to do, and if any of the PREVIOUS nerfs are maybe overkill, looking at the numbrs and reactions you've gotten.

In other words: Be honest and forthright, and don't just PRETEND you care what the players think, actually take your users' requirements into account when doing your software design.

no, you can't please all the people all the time. But if you're only pleasing a tiny minority who wouldn't say "[censored]" if they had a mouthful, you really need to re-examine your idea.

For that matter, when a thread about coming anti-nerfs comes along, and it gets hijacked into a replacement for the Consolidated ED thread MONTHS later, maybe you should STILL consider a slight redesign.

Because obviously, not everyone unhappy with it has left already.

Gosh, you're right. Why didn't I ever think of it that way?? Oh my God, I could've been making the game better, creating new code, even making the WORLD better!! What on EARTH have I been thinking, posting my trivial thoughts out here during server down time or slow times at work??! I mean, it's not as if this forum is here just so a bunch of paying customers can post their concerns, thoughts, creative impulses, constructive criticisms and just occasionally vent about the very game they love and are paying for!!!

No, wait a minute....I'm right, and you're being a self-righteous prig about what people SHOULDN'T be wasting their time doing, basically calling them fools, while following in their very footsteps. Well, let me ask you then: Who is more foolish, the fool, or the fool who follows him?

WE are actually sending constant petitions, by way of these very e-mails explaining what we would like changed and what left alone about the game we love. Sometimes, that involves criticism. Sometimes, praise.

Which brings me to: Nice job again on the EB/AV, Stealth changes, devs...and the costume options, what's good for the goose and all that.

But YOU? What are YOU doing? Why, you're actually participating in the very thing you classify YOURSELF as a waste of time, and do so with wild predictions (If it hasn't changed yet, it won't, no sir, I foresee that in my Tarot cards, nope, that's the future all right).

Personally, I'd say if you have an argument, make it, if you've made your argument, move on if you think it's a waste of time. But don't insult those who DON'T think it's a waste of time to opine on what they like, and would like to see next, in a thread created for that very purpose, and then presume to act as though you are somehow "above" alll of the rest of us poor peons.

I'm not buying it. And I doubt anyone else is, either.

[ QUOTE ]
With so much of the insanity that explodes across these boards everytime the developers make a change or a mistake is made, it's not suprising they only talked about the here and the now with what the players knew. Why discuss changes that might not be needed and therefore not be released? In the end they decided they were needed after all and implemented them. It doesn't seem to matter how they handle things though, there turns out to be a spectacle regardless. They tried to play it cautiously and it blew up in their face anyway. Seems to be no matter what they do they lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is doublespeak of Orwellian magnitude. The boards exploded in a way NEVER SEEN BEFORE over ED. This was because of what had been done, how it had been done, and because the LAST nerf was sold specifically on the idea that something like this would NEVER be done, hence slotting could compensate for base-value reductions to a certain extent.

To claim that the company failed to tell us because we might not like it, and so it was better to just lie to us, mislead us, and then implement it in a backdoor fashion calling it "diversification" and hiding it behind an NDA SO THAT IT WOULDN'T MAKE US AS ANGRY OR TO AVOID PLAYER BACKLASH is just ridiculous.

Players get mad when changes are made that they don't like. Players get more angry when changes are made that they don't like with no warning and little testing. They get even MORE angry when all the testing they HAVE done, and past complaints they have made, result in MORE changes in the SAME direction with NO warning and LITTLE testing. To then tell them "it's to encourage you to slot more effectively", exactly how the LAST nerf was essentially explained away, is just BEGGING for a volcanic eruption.

First came the earthquake, THEN came the Tsunami.

[ QUOTE ]
From what I've read, the changes in Issue 5 were done with the knowledge that ED might have to be put in place if the changes in Issue 5 weren't enough. So at that time they were presenting things in that fashion because they hadn't done enough testing to know if ED would be needed at all. After collecting the data they decided that ED was indeed needed. Now that ED has been around and they have more data collected I understand that they are now going to begin tweaking things with small buffs in those areas where they are needed to rebalance things. With things as they are after these changes they have a much better idea which powers and powersets as well as which archetypes are underperforming and by how much. I don't however expect these changes too much until the Defense Scaling is added. They will either be released simultaneously or after DS so that more testing can be done. Maybe even a little of both.

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't heard anything about defense scaling, but if it buffs those who lost defense/damres in powers that only take that kind of slotting, it'll be an effective rollback of I5/ED to some degree. It will NOT, however, help those who lost out on OTHER single-enhancement type powers, or those who lost Healing potential and so forth.

Still, it's better than nothing. If that's what it is. Which I don't feel like researching. Just lazy, I guess.

[ QUOTE ]
Think of it like this: Without ED, PvP would be even MORE a game of "Get In The First Shot". It's bad enough as it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Disagree. In fact, there's a post floating around right now talking about how a tank and a stalker were stalemated. And how boring that is. It's why no one plays tic-tac-toe.

Oh, and the element of surprise, and the concept of the pre-emptive strike, are well-documented and effective battle strategies in the real world of military doctrine. It is why the feint and the "bait" concepts were developed. It is the nature of an ambush, which usually is a trap for an offensive force TRYING to strike first. So unless you are arguing that stupidity should be rewarded in PvP, or that real-world strategy should play no role in how PvP combat works, I would argue that this is a most unconvincing argument.

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, but you're just being obstinate here. ED is incorporated into the design of CoV, meaning that to roll back ED all of CoV would have to be redone.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



BUZZ Wrong, see i was in CoV Beta...ED was added in th e weak before it went live...it was /never/ intergrated with it


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Yes, the devs thought of ED on that day, coded it all up and put it in the game. The point he was making is that the CoV ATs were designed with the knowledge that ED was going to happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless it is your claim that they were made stronger so as to be less "gimped" by ED, in which case the heroes who WEREN'T made that way are in BIG trouble when the villains get to lvl 50, there is no point to this. Either the PC's are balanced hero and villain, or they're not. If they ARE balanced, then rolling ED back won't alter that balance, just the way people can slot, and how slotting choices affect balance. Which is to say "If you choose to slot per ED when ED is not in effect, and I do not, then we can see if the argument that ED doesn't "nerf" characters is true or not."

All of this is a canard. And WAY off topic.

Thanks again for the EB/AV change, devs, and for not nerfing stealth. And thanks for giving me hope that you WILL eventually alleviate the suffering caused by ED/I5 joined together.

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even if everyone
who ever used the tactic in question only ever played solo, its use would spread and trivialize
the game for more and more people.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



You haven't yet adequately explained why trivializing the game is bad. I'm sure it is, although I only bother playing CoH to trivialize it (for good reasons, mind you)

I'd post that argument here, but I don't want to overload you, since you haven't responded to my first post, yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish you wouldn't quote him...I'm trying to ignore him...

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Remberfolks

SiconOfSatan Lord of the Flame Wars
Neko_Lurker Lord of the Typos


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Can I have a title, too?

Maybe "Dasher, Lord of the Rant" (I think I'm probably a shoo-in for this one), or "Patron Saint of the Lost Cause"?



Dasher (Something or Other of the Something)

[/ QUOTE ]

"Dasher, Jester of the Suppressor"?

"Dasher, Lord of travel and lost luggage"?

"Dasher, Suffering Sheik of Suppression"?

"Dasher, Peon of Pulcritude"?

lol

[ QUOTE ]
Did you reply to that twice?

Oh, and still interloping.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. then I deleted it. so you can't prove it.

Erm...except I admitted it...

Rats.

[ QUOTE ]
Interloping.

[/ QUOTE ]

KILL THE INTERLOPER!!!

[ QUOTE ]
Changing the title of a thread in the Developer's Corner is just uncool in my opinion. I don't even think you guys are talking about the endurance discount anymore anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

See, Personamorpher, this is the kind of thing that gets you flamed. I'm not even saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that, when your post slams them TWICE, it's not unreasonable to assume that ONE of them MIGHT get pissed off.

We own this thread now. Interlopers BEWARE!!

[ QUOTE ]
give it ups Satan its clear to EVERYONE that your just a poor clone of me...that why things you say or i Say are interchamble to the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shhh...if Marvel hears you, they'll sue for "clone wars" infringement...even though they try to pretend they never did that sad excuse for a storyline...

[ QUOTE ]
Remberfolks

SiconOfSatan Lord of the Flame Wars
Neko_Lurker Lord of the Typos

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL!! I'm gonna put that in my signature! The typo in my name is a beautiful touch, by the way.

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

they rollback the ED patch, they would have to code the enhancement display stuff back in.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Leave it out. I'd rather have things be guesswork, but not nerfed, than nerfed, and obviously so.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



its still guess work sicon, oh sur e its stright forward on dammage but thing lie kdefense are still guess work

that 57.7% on those defenses are real 57.7% of the base among (30% for say TI so your looking at +57.7% of 30%) whihc actually HURTS new players who see their dmg is doing 50% more and their defense is 50% beter so they expect to take 50% less damamge not roughy 15% less

[/ QUOTE ]

Granted. I just liked the pithiness of my response, since brevity is, I've been told, the soul of wit. Given the average length of my posts, not to mention the complaints about the sheer number of them in a row, I thought I might be wise to use a little more brevity. If that's not a paradox.

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

they rollback the ED patch, they would have to code the enhancement display stuff back in.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Leave it out. I'd rather have things be guesswork, but not nerfed, than nerfed, and obviously so.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Just saying there was something added with ED. You were the one saying ED added nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, no, that wasn't me. That was a different poster. I was responding to your response.

But let me say it now...ED added NOTHING. The "indicator" numbers are completely separate code implemented in TANDEM with the implementation of ED, as well as in tandem with everything ELSE that was implemented in I6 with the release of CoV.

So, no, ED doesn't have anything to do with that. But my point is, even if it WAS an "if this - then that" gain/loss, I'd be fine with it. As would, I think, everyone else who hates ED.

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, first, I never said you got NOTHING from drops.

Your memory much like your comprehension skills need improvement:


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And in order to be fully decked out with SO's at even-con level the moment he hits lvl 50, he CAN'T be gaining prestige, or he won't have any inf. to spend on SO's.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I can accept that, but I misspoke. Only by taking me absolutely literally here could you think I meant "none". Since that seems to suggest that YOUR comprehension skills are what are lacking here, I will replace the word "any" with the phrase "anywhere near enough", so as to help alleviate your apparent confusion as to my meaning.

[ QUOTE ]
And none of this answers the math I did so painstakingly in that post for you.

It must have been painful to pull numbers from where you did.


[/ QUOTE ]

This, also, is not a substantive response. If you contend that my numbers are not accurate, please feel free to elaborate on why, and what would be more accurate. If you can't, then just admit that you're wrong, and I'm right, and be done with it.

[ QUOTE ]
Your example you were running invincible missions. This is not required to play the game. As you pointed out it is actually making the game more difficult, as it should. Also your proposed XP numbers that do not seem to fall in line with the actual XP requirements to gain a level in the 30+ game.


[/ QUOTE ]

I make more inf per kill, and make my kills pretty quickly. I also get more xp per kill. Which means, if my numbers are off compared to your "less difficult" missions, it SHOULD mean that it takes you longer to level, and hence would get more enhancement drops, albeit of a lower level, and hence worth less per sale. In the end, I would think these would balance out, but that's pure assumption on my part. Perhaps in the test we do, you should run on tenacious, or Heroic even, and I'll run on invinc, and we'll see who gets what. The thing is, if we do that, we are adding MORE variables to the problem, hence making the results MORE difficult to interpret. Since the only issue under dispute here is whether or not enhancement drops alone are enough to keep you well outfitted, I would think that would be unneccessary (to run at different difficulties).

But, if invincible is too HARD for you...

[ QUOTE ]
which you still haven't defined...do you mean "ended up with" when you stopped playing them regularly, or ended up with after buying all enhancements as soon as you hit level 50?

The latter. People who are still playing have excess of 50M a few I know even got into the 200M range.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, obviously, if you keep playing, and never need to buy anything else, the upper end of inf you can gain is infinite. That's why I was asking. Since your answer is "the latter", I still have to say I don't accept your thesis. But then again, I've never played on anything less than Invincible after level 30, as I prefer a more challenging game than you do, apparently.

By the way, if you are not playing on the most challenging level, and are complaining that the influence gained from drops AND kills is too much, perhaps it isn't out-of-line to suggest that you are desiring more challenge. In which case, i would think the answer would be obvious...

[ QUOTE ]
P.S. I was just re-reading this after posting it, and I noticed something: You must suck at this game. That's the only way you could die enough to stay in a level long enough to get enough drops to have enough money to do what you said you did.

Nope sorry. I generally get complimented as one of the best players people have seen and was one of the highest level villains on Virtue for the first week of CoV. I did die but it was by no means frequently.

Yup, it all makes sense now. You suck

And not but a few posts back you were proclaiming I was too good for the game. Perhaps I'm just a whole lot better and particularly smarter than you? In this statement you've essentially said that i utilized what was supposed to be a punishment to maximize my rewards. I'd say that's downright ingenious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, I was being sarcastic before. Again, it would seem YOUR comprehension is what is lacking here, not mine. Also, to be perfectly clear, I'm also being facetious (and a little vengeful) in saying "you suck". I've never played with you (and don't really want to, to be honest), and hence have no way to know what your skill level is, in-game. I know it's not too good on the forums, but the two aren't necessarily intertwined. However, you SAYING you're one of the "best players in the game" really doesn't mean much. Braggadocio is seldom an accurate portrayal of reality. Often, it's simply compensation for "short"-comings. If you know what I mean. Which, from the looks of your general comprehension of anything not explicitly and literally stated, isn't likely.

Oh, and for god's sake, use the quote button. As you can see above, your "bolding" doesn't persist from reply-to-reply, doesn't separate my quotes from yours, and you don't bother with demarcation. I know what I said, and you know what you said, but no one else is going to know that two different people said these things. Seriously, it's easier to do than bolding, and it's easier to read. To refuse to use the mechanisms given for clear responses is just as ineffective as eschewing inf from kills in-game.

Hey, by the way, are you posting under another name?

Buh-bye.

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P.S. I was just re-reading this after posting it, and I noticed something: You must suck at this game. That's the only way you could die enough to stay in a level long enough to get enough drops to have enough money to do what you said you did.

Yup, it all makes sense now. You suck. Heh. Sorry it took me so long to realize it. Guess you're not a liar after all.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Umm ... so deaths mean someone sucks? Death *IS* suppose to be a learning tool. Anyway, I die ... and frankly i've gotten the first death badge -- and cause I *suck* cause i push a character to the breaking point. I find every weakness and strength.

Hell, i've fought and just about died an somehow got some good hits and survived. Then, again, i forgot i'm suppose to suck cause i die.

come on. find something else to be lame about.

You probably got PL'd or something, dropped on your head, and skipped the deaths. Who knows. but there is nothing wrong with dieing. so give out over it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The post to Xeroshadow is in the context of a long-standing feud between the two of us on these boards. Specifically, it refers to his claims to not need the influence/infamy gained in defeating foes/missions in order to fully and effectively enhance one's character. And the "you suck" comment is in DIRECT response to him saying something similar to me.

I can understand you feeling defensive about it, but honestly, it's not a general condemnation of dying in-game. In fact, one of my ongoing themes in this thread is that, even BEFORE the I5/I6 nerfs, death was not avoidable even for the so-called "uber" class and powerset, the inv/ tank.

So calm down, Beavis.

Finally, before you start throwing around accusations about me being PL'ed, you might want to check my post history, specifically in the consolidated PL thread. I am, or was, one of the most vociferous (and some would say venomous) opponents of PL'ing, even to the point of calling it a way of "cheating", and suggesting that broadcasting for PL's should be a bannable offense.

I'm gonna let you off with a warning on this one. But for future reference, you take potshots at me at your own risk. I have little to do at work overnight, and researching your post history would, I'm sure, give me plenty of ammo with which to fling insults back at you, baseless or not. I don't LIKE flame wars, but I don't pretend to be above them.

Alrighty then, have a good day, and drive safely, sir. These roads can be treacherous.

[ QUOTE ]
You stated that you got no influence from drops. I stated I gathered a frickin buttload from drops. You are splitting hairs. I dropped out of SGmode for End of Arc bonuses because I thought they should have been scaled differently than simply being reduced to a mission complete prestige wise.


[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, first, I never said you got NOTHING from drops. That's false. If you say it again, I'd suggest you find the quote and put it in the post, otherwise I'm going to have to call you a liar. Again.

Secondly, now you're admitting even MORE "influence" not from drops. And none of this answers the math I did so painstakingly in that post for you. And if you think I "suck", then let's do this: We'll both start a character on the same server, with the same powersets, we'll play that character from one-fifty, in SG mode the entire time, and we'll record the exact drops we get, in each mission, how much inf we get from them when we sell them, and how much we have total at each "buy all new enhancements" level, and what we bought in the form of how all our powers were enhanced at that point, and how much inf we had left over. We'll also record each mission, and when we die (because the more debt you have, the longer it takes to level, and the more time you have to get enhancements to sell). That's the only way to settle this objectively. Of course, it would have to be on the honor system, since there is no way to prevent cheating by, say, getting a friend to give you inf.

Or better yet, YOU do it in SG mode, and I'll do it with inf from kills and mission bonuses, and we'll compare all the same notes, and we'll see who's right and who's wrong, once and for all.

If you don't want to go to all that trouble, then show me where the numbers were wrong in the post I did where I showed there is NO way you could get that kind of inf without kills/mission bonuses. Or shut up. Because your anecdotal evidence, even were it true and not exaggeration and poor recollection, does not reflect the "average" level 50, nor what they "ended up with" (which you still haven't defined...do you mean "ended up with" when you stopped playing them regularly, or ended up with after buying all enhancements as soon as you hit level 50?)

Anyway, this isn't going anywhere, and I'm bored with it.

P.S. I was just re-reading this after posting it, and I noticed something: You must suck at this game. That's the only way you could die enough to stay in a level long enough to get enough drops to have enough money to do what you said you did.

Yup, it all makes sense now. You suck. Heh. Sorry it took me so long to realize it. Guess you're not a liar after all.

[ QUOTE ]
they rollback the ED patch, they would have to code the enhancement display stuff back in.


[/ QUOTE ]

Leave it out. I'd rather have things be guesswork, but not nerfed, than nerfed, and obviously so.

[ QUOTE ]
ME on the other hand ive always proposed tanks shoud not only be tough but hit hardbut have a horible, horible rechnage on every attack.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this whole-heartedly. When they hit you, it should hurt worse than any other attacker (with the possible exception of blasters), but they should have a much slower attack rate, either because they are so big, so dense, so dumb, generally slow, or because they are very, very careful about WHO they are hitting, and how hard, so as to avoid killing an innocent bystander, a teammate, or even a villain (since tanks are heroes, after all).

And thanks for the backup, Neko.

[ QUOTE ]
KNEEL BEFORE ZOD...ER..SCIONOFSATAN!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm not Schizophrenic.

[ QUOTE ]
I for one welcome our new multi-posting overlords.

[/ QUOTE ]

KNEEL BEFORE ZOD...ER..SCIONOFSATAN!!!

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

that sounds like saying Tomb Raider is a direct descendent of Zork text based games with puzzles :-p


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



And that assertion would be accurate. Software is evolving a much more rapid rate than we do. Hardware even faster still.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some don't believe in evolution. Some believe in intelligent design.

Of course, those people probably were never in on a design-requirements meeting.