Shadestorm

Cohort
  • Posts

    179
  • Joined

  1. Given what people have managed to build for, and the incarnate system, there should definately be badges for soloing Giant Monsters. Some people can do it already, and that number will only grow as more incarnate slots are unlocked.

    For colliding with the edge of any zone map, here's an easter egg reference, and a "me too!" badge for everyone who couldn't quite get that troublesome OTHER War Wall blueside badge:


    War Wall Inspector (Hero)

    They look safe, but you just had to be sure.


    Needs a Bigger Boat (Villain)

    There are worse things than sharks in these waters. Things like you.
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by DSorrow View Post
    Achieving the influence cap. That is, having 2bil influence on a character at once by any means (trades etc. are okay).

    Bought the Bank(hero)

    Broke the Bank(villain)

    A bank big enough to hold your riches hasn't been built yet.
  3. In light of the above post, here are a few ideas:

    AS:
    Leave it be. The next suggestion passively buffs it more efficiently for team usage anyway.

    Hide:
    Distraction bonus - For each team member, it takes the stalker one less second to passively re-hide by neither dealing nor taking damage.

    Distraction (effect added to assassination inherant):
    You are more lethal when your enemies are otherwise occupied.
    For each team member, the stalker gains a 20% damage buff effect every two seconds while remaining hidden, stacking to a maximum of 140% this damage bonus is applied as bonus damage for any strike the stalker executes from a Hidden state. The larger your team, and the longer you remain hidden before striking, the more damage you will do to any enemy you ambush from hide.

    Bonus points if stalkers get a bar for this to make it a readable as brute fury!

    This means that stalkers that want to scrap will have identical performance to what they do now. However stalkers that choose to be more selective, or are tasked with quickly eliminating problem targets can adopt an extremely efficient hit and run playstyle without suffering a net damage loss on teams. In practical terms, this allows the stalker to do a combination of spikes and sustained DPS throughout the course of a fight as he sees fit by using increased critical chances from straight scrapping, guaranteed bonus damage from letting distraction build, or (more likely) a combination of both.

    For AS alone, you're getting at least 80% more damage on a team of four because you're hidden for at least 9 seconds while activating the power. However, on a team you might not necessarily use the long-firing AS because your distraction bonus is letting you do nice alpha damage with your other attacks. Case in point, if my Nin?Nin decides he's going to just golden dragonfly assassinate people, and I can fire it every five seconds, I'm getting a crit plus 20% damage from one stack of distraction every activation, assuming I take no damage and make no other attacks between golden dragonfly strikes. This allows me to choose the pacing of my alphas, and know I have a reliable chance of re-hiding and oneshotting those minions or LTs if I choose to adopt a stalk-and-oneshot approach with an attack I know is beefy enough.

    The upside is that no matter what the team is doing, I am pulling my weight. If a target I'm about to hit falls over, I remain hidden while I move to the next target, stacking more distraction. If I hit the target, I contributed damage and made it fall over. This makes me far more useful at killing LTs and bosses swiftly and efficiently, but gives me the option to scrap it out with minions and large mobs if I need to. Stalk and snipe will get me more overall DPS, but I can still do decent damage like I do now if I have to scrap.

    For single hard targets like AVs, I'm doing my best of the team by ASing as appropriate and placating, dealing superior single target burst damage as long as I have someone else to keep its attention while I re-hide and build up more distraction. In the mean time I can placate adds off of squishies, or I can figure out a rotation that makes best DPS by timing out my scrapping with my AS recharge, rehide timing, AS casts, and distraction buildup. This means I need to fine tune my timing to get the absolute best DPS rather than repeat an attack chain over and over. So, carefully considered strikes rather than constant spam.

    Placate:
    For each team member, Placate grants a single use auto-placate fired from that team member to your target. This does not modify aggro, and will not grant your team members a hidden state. This means a placated target is unable to target the entire team.


    To explain group placate and aggro, here's an example:

    Full team, stalker placates a boss. Boss drops all targets (Because he's been placated by everyone) but retains aggro list. However, the boss is standing in the tanker's Fiery Aura, and is hit. Thus, the Tanker's placate fizzles, and the boss continues to aggro on the tanker as before the placate.

    Example 2:

    Same boss, but the boss is outside the radius of Fiery Aura, and is hit by a corruptor's AoE. The corruptor's placate drops, so the boss may attack him, however any attacker with aggro higher on the list that hits this boss (and thus drops their placate) will immediate get the Boss again.

    Example 3:

    Stalker calls "I am placating Boss" and placates the boss outside of AoE range. The boss sits there with its thumb up its *** until the stalker hits it with an AS. Because of the team's placates, it is unable to attempt to attack anyone else until the placates wear off, but is still being affected by the tank's aggro AoE. Thus, the stalker can happily take down the boss with impunity, draw it to the tank, or simply leave it sit there with its thumb up its *** with a second placate. This effectively allows the stalker to placate lock a problem target for the team as long as it is not being attacked in the same manner the stalker would placate lock a target for himself, but this mechanic does not prevent the tank from stacking aggro aura, or simply engaging the target directly to build up aggro while it is unable to attack the rest of the team.
  4. Any fix related to stalkers is all very much dependent on isolating what stalkers do.

    I think the issue in comparing us to scrappers, brutes, or hell, even blasters is simply unfair to the stalker AT as a whole.

    Lets face it, when you're playing solo, you don't PLAY a stalker like any of those ATs until you're slotted to the hilt with IOs because it's bloody impossible. Even after you've got your massive softcapped, or massive damage, or massive recharge, or whatever build you've dreamed up, that playstyle continues to assert itself.

    Sure, I CAN play my Nin/Nin like a scrapper, but he's not a scrapper, and playing him like one impacts both my damage potential and survivability. I CAN play him like a stealthed blapper, but doing so still impacts both of those things. I CAN play him like a brute, but that confers the same problem as a scrapper.

    The fact of the matter is that Stalkers are not scrappers, they are not brutes, and they are not blappers.

    AoE Considerations are not a stalker consideration, they are a stalker powerset consideration.

    Stalkers, no matter the powerset are built fundamentally around hide, AS, and Placate. No matter what sets you're using, you have, and use, all three of these powers.

    Hide is not just stealth. The hidden state represents not only being unseen, but a state of calm on the part of the stalker that allows him to carefully plant a strike for best effect.

    Placate is not just an aggro control. Placate is an avenue to create that state of calm for a brief moment in both the stalker and the target.

    AS is not just damage. AS is the mastry of that state of calm, used to devastating effect on a single target.

    What sets stalkers apart in terms of playstyle is the reliance on a state of calm in others and himself to defeat his enemies.

    Any changed to stalkers should be approached in terms of "How can we alter stalker signature abilities to make them more useful in group play?" and more importantly "How can the hidden state be made more useful to the stalker's group?"

    Stalkers are not defined by damage. Stalkers are defined by successful use of the Hidden state. The problem with this is that as soon as you're in a group, the Hidden state is immediately less useful because if you're getting hidden, you're not dealing consummate damage for the time spent, or you're using placate and placing others in danger for a tradeoff in damage that is of immediately less benefit to both the stalker and his group.

    In this manner the current critical bonus for group members is actually antithetical to the stalker's role. It's a nice patch for the inability to fulfill that role. The implementation of the terrorize debuff was a step in the right direction. It rewards the stalker and his team for successfully employing his role. Even if the mobs don't stay terrorized, that tohit debuff is a rather nice tertiaty debuff.

    Stalkers need a way to use their tools more efficiently and effectively in groups so that their experience in groups is closer to their experience solo.

    I think the EA-stealth upgrade to hide is a good start. I also think (as I have previously stated) that cutting AS interrupt based on team size is a good idea, and possibly even re-hide time. I also laid out my reasoning for allowing placate to be used as a team buff in some way rather than its current use on teams which is more often than not effectively a debuff.

    I don't think more damage, even if its a mastry of single target damage, is the answer for stalkers. I think more efficient use of the Hidden state on teams is the answer.
  5. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rabid_Metroid View Post
    I think this is the way to go. Maybe give a choice of a few types of dialogue (Hateful, Playful, Possessive, ect...) and a choice of what group they'll use as backup (Arachnos, Longbow, Council, CoT, Prisim Rangers), and you're all set.
    Which is a fantastic idea (which has nothing to do with the thread topic, but still a good idea) except for one thing:

    With very few exceptions, superpowered individuals rarely get to choose their nemesis. That choice is thrust upon them through necessity, opportunity, or random chance. If you *were* going to set up such a system, it would make a lot more sense to manage it by generating the properties of the nemesis reactively based upon the choices of the character in question.

    Honestly, it's just less fun if I go through and hand design my nemesis. There's an utter lack of suprise in that. Ideally, I think it'd be cool if these sort of arch-events simply proliferated throughout the lifespan of the character, slowly building an arch tailored to the opposite of choices I make.

    If I run in to an arch event at level ten, and am given a choice to say something witty, or say something serious... and lets say I choose serious, my arch files that under "arch is less serious" If I'm given a choice of a red or blue door, and I choose red, arch files that under "dislikes the color blue"

    Honestly it'd be quite a bit of work to set up, but you'd basically end up with a half decent costumed arch fitted with specific sets and pieces of sets based on what you've chosen you dislike, and mannerisms/attack patterns in direct opposition of the options you choose.

    I think it could work as long as the arch system though in terms of groups of costume pieces (body, gloves/boots, shoulders/chest, etc.) and used a harmonic color scheme. Obviously it wouldn't end up as involved as a player designed costume, but it would be rather vast in terms of variable apperances for your arch.
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by _Malk_ View Post
    /incendiary rounds
    /oil slick arrow
    /hail of bullets
    /me is in UR oil slick, dodgin' UR attacks.
  7. So, today I finally polished off my defeat badges and unlocked Viridian. I enjoyed his arc IMMENSELY. Now one of my favorite arcs. And hey, 13 merits for arc completion ain't too shabby either.

    However, to get to the point of the thread:

    **********SPOILERS AHEAD!!***********

    In the next to the last mission (Invite The Center) you're only required to defeat Burkholder, but you've got the option of either running for the door afterward to exit, death, or staying put and taking down a full gauntlet of council AVs.

    Now, after the slick intro movie, and the fact that I simply never play blueside, I was thrilled that I had the opportunity to give Center the finger by sticking to my guns and beating the tar out of everything he threw at me (This was actually pretty difficult. They're auto-target ambushes.) By the time I took out Requiem I was severely pleased with myself.

    Then I realized... I didn't really get anything out of it, and if I had died, I wouldn't have had a second chance.

    There really should be a badge for that. Not only is it one hell of a task just to unlock Viridian, but the fact that the entire gauntlet is optional and doesn't leave room for failure just screams "shiny accomplishment badge"

    So here's the thread. Tell me what else you've done that you SWEAR there should be a badge for!



    Left of Center

    You showed The Center you're not to be taken lightly, and left his cronies with an expensive lesson in pain.
  8. Quote:
    Originally Posted by _Malk_ View Post
    o.O

    Stalker forums ----------->
    /me is in UR forums, ASin UR squishies
  9. As much as I hate to say "redside only" if I were personally going to participate, it would have to be.

    All you newfangled blue stalkers are welcome to do what you wish, but I won't be personally joining you.

    That said, it appears there is little to no interest in such a weekly event anyway. Oh well.
  10. Musculature>Radial Paragon for my nin/nin stalker. Stacks pretty much everything I'd like to do a little better, but not so much I want more slots for it.

    Plus, you know, more AS damage. Gotta love that.
  11. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow View Post
    Well, Rogues in Paragon City have their own unique briefing options for Tip missions, and they can't really do much more, such as regular contacts. They are, in fact, not welcome, because no-one will work with them. You CAN still team with other players, but I don't want to encourage strife between players, themselves. Faction on faction and fiction on fiction feuds I'm perfectly fine with, but under NO circumstances do I want to encourage players to be hostile to each other. That's the prime reason I hate PvP - I much prefer cooperation over competition and backstabbing. People will naturally want to be friendly and play together because that's what players do. Write the environment to be hostile, but don't try to make the players hostile to each other.
    You and I have two extremely different views on what consititutes fun, and I shall respectfully agree to disagree with this point.

    That said, it isn't so much about making players shun random dudes because of their morality as it is about thinking up actual valid reasons for having a morality at all.

    Currently, there is zero mechanical differentiation in the play of these characters outside of tip missions and where to go. Swapping sides for content would make loads of sense without the grey moralities in a thematic sense. Taking a grey to the other side means you are explicitly there to either solo tip missions to get to another morality, or team with people to do content you can't do solo.

    Thus, there's really no point in cutting grey moralities off from soloing that content, and similarly no real point in having those moralities, or any moralities whatsoever.

    This is my problem.
  12. Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDragon View Post
    This risks Stalkers griefing teams by targeting the tank or off-tank and causing a team wipe. This might even happen accidentally. No other AT has access to such AT canceling powers. It would be like giving blasters the power to remove controls off people, wouldn't it?

    You might try having it instead grant a temp-power when cast on players that holds different effects for different ATs. As an example, for blasters and corruptors it might be a single burst of anti-taunt. Where as for Tankers and Brutes, it strengthens the effect of their taunt powers temporarily. Sort of a "You should hit that guy, not me" effect.

    Stalkers are in a unique position of being able to leave or stay out of the fight if they want letting them consider their options(in theory). Maybe that should be leveraged?


    (of course if Castle don't see nozing wrong with the class. Talk is for naught.)
    On the one hand, this is a cool idea. On the other hand, not doing something because you COULD grief your team with it is silly. Anybody COULD grief the team by aggroing too many spawns, or slotting presence and screwing up aggro, or any number of other things.

    On top of that, AT specific effects aren't always viable. Some blasters or MMS actually want aggro, some don't. Figuring up an across the board effect seems the best solution, and my thinking was that no tools really exist to anti-aggro effectively on teams, so it would be a perfect niche for stalker placate.
  13. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Supernumiphone View Post
    I'm still of the opinion that the lack of AoE is the main limiter on Stalkers' contribution on teams (and therefore the perception of them), but it looks like that discussion is over.
    I disagree. Designing more AoE in to stalkers just turns them in to me-too scrappers with better stealth. Brutes already got very close to being me-too scrappers.

    Stalkers are explicitly designed around single target damage and aggro-based mitigation. Those signature stalker skills are both underperformers on teams The problem is:

    A - AS is very good DPA, however its animation is SO bloody long that no matter the difficulty you never have a chance to use it on teams.

    B - Placate not only has the potential of screwing up aggro for everyone, but on teams its unlikely the stalker is taking enough aggro to need to use it.

    C - The stalker's single target damage does not exceed available single target damage of ATs not designed as single target assassins, even WITH AS.

    The solutions could be:

    A - Strengthen AS as part of the team buff mechanic. Call it a distraction bonus. The more stuff distracting your target, the easier it is to isolate the sweet spot and stab the **** out of it. Each team member grants your AS a shorter activation time and increased damage.

    B - Allow placate to be used on allies. Placating at an ally (may require alternate animation or facing) would grant a wide PBAoE -taunt, similar to the way AS grants a terrorize. This places stalkers an a unique position to "anti-tank" Simultaneously helping both squishies and other melee be keeping aggro focused. This gives the stalkers the ability to do for teams what they can do for themselves, manipulate aggro at will in a deflective rather than absorptive fashion.

    C - Increase global damage bonus OR give stalkers an additional BU-style autohit damage buff for each successful AS. This encourages stalkers to use their signature tools often, and rewards them for isolating and successfully assassinating things. Again, this combines with the team buff to AS to ensure the stalker spends his time stalking the biggest, hardest, toughest thing in the mob, or leveraging GOBS of damage at large single hard targets.

    I believe these propositions would create a stalker teams wanted for its ability to do for teams exactly what it does solo. Kill hard targets extremely quickly with AS, and defensively manage aggro via placate.
  14. Shadestorm

    lolincarnates

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Test_Rat View Post
    Can anyone make a convincing argument why a team should take a staker over a brute or scrapper at this point?
    I'm a ninja.
  15. Ninjitsu?

    It's alright I guess.

  16. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill View Post
    And your reasoning for that is?

    Quite frankly, this comes very close to how the PVP zones *were* prior to I9. They already bring you up to a *minimum* level - bringing everything to the *same* level isn't that much farther of a stretch.

    The problem, however, comes with determining that level - if it's Praetorian, current, then 20. BUT SSK rules still take effect in the zones NOW, which means (for instance) in Siren's Call you're facing exemped 50s with primary-set tier9s (controllers with pets, for instance, or masterminds with that final upgrade, tanks with their tier9 armor, and so forth.) If that could be nullified - and done in every PVP zone - it'd be better.
    This. Back when people used PvP zones (before IO sets) they did so BECAUSE of how easy it was to simply drop in and find some good fights over cool temp powers without having to worry overly much about being out-spreadsheeted.

    Sure, a purposely designed PvP build was good then, but it wasn't so much better that there was literally zero hope of getting a good fight on your mostly PvE toon.

    After IOs, the disparity between toons built for PvP, and those that showed up on their PvE toons became too great, and all of the casual PvP crowd quit.

    Aftwerward, the zone regulars, seeing the zones being mostly empty started dropping off because there weren't any more fights in the zones. Some of them (myself included) just stayed gone. Some of them became arena all-stars and event organizers.

    While I don't agree on the specifics of this idea (for one, what's the point of having an inf entry fee if you're creating throwaway characters?) I do agree that a "sets off" PvP zone, or even a shard off of the current zones with a sets off rule would be a huge step forward in to getting people excited about zone PvP again.

    PvE guys could actually drop in for PvP and have a chance of winning again, and those who wanted to spec for it could do so on an alt build rather cheaply with nothing but SOs or white IOs and still have a shot at winning fights.

    THAT is what people want in zone PvP. This is how they were designed in the first place. Parity, accessibility, and chaos. Save the arenas for the all-pros. That's what they're designed for. Zone PvP ain't about being uber. It's about having fun smashing the other guys in a large area with something to fight over. It's about ambushes, and holding a point and taking the other guy's shard or bounty or launch code or pillbox. Turning it in to "my math is better than your math" simply made it less fun.

    Yes, Taking your top tier PvP build against another guy is awesome and fun. However if you expect PvP zones to be packed with worthy opponents EVER in the current system you're sorely mistaken. You're living in a game where PvP was a late addition, and most of the playerbase that's going to PvP wants to do it on the same toons they use to PvE. What IS clear at the moment is that PvP zones just plain don't work when there's nobody in them.

    The way to get people to be in them is to design them so that the largest portion of the player base feels like they can simply show up and accomplish something.
  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow View Post
    You lost me at PvP, I'm afraid. I'm not opposed to a nemesis style system, but I don't think it's something you want to tie to PvP, simply because it isn't needed. Now, having an option to assign a real player as your nemesis, that I can't really argue about, but if that nemesis HAD to be a player, then I'm not interested.
    There's actually a lot of chatter in my thread on SG systems with the same sentiment, and you bring up a good point.

    So, let's think shall we? After all, it is a think tank.

    Something we went in to with the SG arc system was leveraging the Kheldian mob replacement systems to create SG arcs that layered on top of existing content by chaining events for the SG.

    Now, Approaching an arching system in the same fashion is completely doable, however it doesn't address the problem that spawned the thread in the first place:

    Promoting inter-faction strife. Creating reasons why players of opposing factions should genuinely be uncomfortable with each other. How can we leverage a system that doesn't include PvP (as I know the very mention of PvP makes some people very uncomfortable) to accomplish that goal?

    I'm at a loss on this one, as I can't honestly think of any reason outside of direct player intervention that players of opposing factions WOULD be uncomfortable with each other. This is the situation we have now. Vigilante visits the rogue isles to be buddies with villains rather than stop villains from committing crimes. This is thematically all kinds of wrong, and takes quite a bit away from the concept of having a side in the first place.

    I'm not against side switching, and I'm not against grey moralities. What I am against is the mindset grey moralities currently carry. Taking that grey morality should be about PUNISHING evildoers, or EXPLOITING do-gooders, not helping them with whatever nefarious/charitable tasks they're in to.

    The extremes of that grey area are already really well done in the tip missions, as is the moral slide in to light or darkness respectively. I had a lot of fun sliding from hero, to vigilante, to villain on my warshade.

    What isn't well done is the execution of those grey moralities in a thematic sense as a long term alignment. Taking a rogue to paragon city doesn't feel any more dangerous than staying at home. Nobody's wary of my motives, nobody's ready to tell me they don't work with scum like me unless it absolutely necessary. Nobody's threatening to have me arrested if I step out of line for even a second. Hell, everyone's happy to see me, wants me to join their posi taskforce, and then throw flowers and ******* lollipops at me for being such a cool random guy walking the streets.

    This feels wrong. Not just in a roleplaying sense, but in a general gameplay sense. Every stick of every bit of anything presented in the entire game indicates that I am the enemy here. The problem is that the gameplay doesn't reflect that lore at all.

    I guess I'm trying to say that it's not so much a thread about PvP as it is a thread about reinforcing that line. We were advertised shades of grey.

    What we have now is one big blob of grey with no more black or white.
  18. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
    Sorry, but as a tank, I'm too busy smashing stuff up to worry about thinking.



    Unfortunately, with an archnemesis system like you're talking about it only really works if both sides consent, are on at the same time, and want to actually stop what they're doing to go mash their opponent's face (sorry, gotta leave the Hami raid! Have to go beat down my archnemesis so he still knows I care!).

    Also, how do you balance say an IO'ed-to-the-gills Brute against an SO'ed-at-best Defender?

    Honestly, I believe such a system will fail due to apathy over time.
    This wasn't really conceived as something you'd want to be doing all day every day. By nature, it's a system that's more about assigning an optional PvP risk to your every day activities with the option to be proactive if you're bored.

    Its far more about your Arch coming to screw with you while you're in the middle of something than it is about you going to screw with him.

    The system itself is consentual by nature. I don't believe anyone who doesn't WANT to face a random faceplant from an Arch should have to.

    As for the balance question, my thinking was simply: Don't balance it.

    Another option would be to attempt selection of an Arch that is roughly my equivalent AT/powerset. So brutes would match with brutes or tanks, scrappers with scraps/stalkers, etc. However I think its simply more fun to forget balancing it, and just let players find that perfect long term arch through trial and error.

    Lets face it, the players that opt in to such a system clearly know what they're getting in to.

    If I'm clearly outmatched, I surrender and get on with my life. My Arch has proven himself the victor, gets a couple shinies and I'm no worse for wear. I can move on to the next arch, or take a break from arching and maybe work on my build before I decide I want to try it again.

    As for the online timing issues I can see where that would be a problem. Perhaps the best solution would be to give the participants the option to specify a playtime window to help the system match arches. Barring that, perhaps an option to 'truce' if no blows have been traded in the space of a week, allowing the two to move on to more compatible arches without the embarassment of ending up on someone's defeated list.

    I don't think its an apathy risk as much as other forms of PvP simply because its designed to foster some pretty impressive loot rewards, and it gives the participants the unique opportunity to absolutely mangle another player pretty much anywhere (within their chosen Arch limits) which creates a very comic book experience.

    If anything, I'd see the typical arch fight like mad for the first few days, then taper off to occasional battles when one or the other wants to stir up trouble.

    It's a 50s system designed to create a more extensible endgame. Like the incarnate system, it serves as an option for people that have hit the enhancement ceiling and want good reasons to play that favorite 50 rather than reroll.

    There's too little incentive to stick with your 50s IMO.
  19. System 1: The Archnemesis.

    The Archnemesis system aims to put two players from opposing factions in to a long terms relation of mutual disdain. Its design goals are to promote interaction and combat between the two players in a manner that is acceptable to both of them, and create a gameplay environment where awareness of ones Arch is an inescapable fact of life for both players.

    Upon reaching level 50, the player will be given the option to opt in to the Arching system via notoriety contacts. Each player selects the level of involvement they prefer from among the following options:

    Legal attack conditions - Where can I be attacked by my Arch? City zones, SG base, inside instanced missions, on TFs, etc. It is important to tailor these options so that players can specifically choose their level of involvement.

    Death Penalties - None, inspiration drops, salvage drops, recipe drops.

    These conditions go both ways. When you've selected the specifics of your arching arrangement, the system will randomly select a player from the opposing faction with matching conditions. This means if you want the potential to beat down your arch for recipes by ambushing him in the middle of a door mission, your arch can do the same to you. This is a mutual system that ensures the players involved get exactly what they signed up for. The system is random to promote player interaction and target diversity, as well as prevent exploitation of additional reward mechanics.

    Tracking - Okay, great, you've got an Arch. Where is that arch? With the vastness of the game, how do we find out where to spring our trap, or stop that villain from finishing off a longbow base?

    The answer is informants. Informants are an inf sink which allows each player to spend a specific amount of infamy on a per zone basis to keep a "man on the street" with an eye out for your arch. For each zone I want watched, I can pay an informant contact a static amount in inf to notify me via the events channel for 24 hours if my arch is sighted in that zone. If I am normally unable to travel to that zone, I would have the opportunity to do so as as long as my arch has not travelled to another zone. (Example: My Arch was sighted in Atlas park, but I am a villain. I can travel to Atlas Park, and remain there even if he enters door missions or his SG base. However, if he hops a train to go to another zone, I will be ejected.)

    Additionally, if my arch is a moral tourist (vigi or rogue) I will be automatically notified by any NPC my arch talks to on my "home turf" (E.G. If my vigilant arch sells salvage at the Cap Au Diable black market, Shady Mia would tell me about it.)

    Rewards!

    In addition to the optional loot drops, The arching system confers a themed power called victory. Victory is roughly equivalent to an accolade power in terms of effect and recharge. There are multiple versions of victory, and they are all self-only powers. These include a full range buffs (self +damage(all) Self +res(all), etc.) but I can only select one.

    However, if I am defeated, I lose access to the victory power. In turn, my arch gains access to his. This means that between the two characters, only one will have access to victory at any given time... the current victor of our last battle.

    The Strength of victory is directly proportional to the amount of legal attack methods I have selected. If I have selected zone-only vulnerability, my victory power (and that of my arch) will be far less powerful than that of someone who has elected to be vulnerable at all times.

    Quitting -

    I can end the arching relationship at any time by visiting an notoriety contact and surrendering. If my Arch surrenders, I gain not only badge progress, but I get to keep a disposable (stacking) temp power version of the victory power. In addition, my Arch's name is added to my personal info under "Arch-nemeses Defeated" to prove that I am clearly the superior crimefighter/agent of discord. My defeated nemesis gets to keep nothing.
  20. Problem: Heroes and Villains have been repeatedly pushed toward mutual understanding, love, peace, and cooperation.

    In the beginning, it was Pocket D. A fun little distraction with a weird mission involving valentine's day.

    Then came the coop zones and TFs.

    Then came the grey moralities.

    These are all great things, but with I19 around the corner advertising even more cooperative content, I fear we've lost sight of something.

    Heroes and Villains are not friends. They are as diametrically opposed in ideologies as it gets.

    Villains and Vigilantes are even less so. Vigilantes don't want Villains Arrested. They want them DEAD.

    Heroes and Rogues are about as morally compatible as it gets in the general theme of things. Rogues aren't picky as long as there's a payday involved, and Heroes might logically tolerate them as long as they're not being TOO evil... at the time.

    I'm not saying these features are bad. The coop zones are fun, and from a development standpoint a smart way to design content that can reach a broader number of players.

    However, I am saying that with all of these optional systems to enable cooperation, why haven't there been similar systems put in place to encourage being enemies?

    Yes, PvP zones exist. However they were implemented at one point, found unpopular, and forgotten. Part of it is the repeated changes and updates which turned PvP in to a buyer's game. Part of it is that those systems require the player to stop what they're already doing to go enforce the law or sense of powersonal power upon someone else.

    Why does a vigilante go to the rogue isles? Thematically, he's be doing it to punish the wicked. In reality, he's going there to get lovey dovey with the enemy.

    Thus, I begin this thread to focus on think tanking optional systems to promote the struggle of good versus evil in the player space.
  21. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ossuary View Post
    Is that it? Is that what it does?

    When GR released, I made a Stalker because...I didn't have one, having deleted the few I'd made.

    Anyway, I read the power descriptions, including Assassin Strike, since I was sure I had heard about changes to the AT at some point. The fear debuff sounded cool, but then it seemed to go off only once in a very great while. I wondered why they even bothered adding the mechanic since it so rarely occurred. I guess most of my targets died after the AS, so I was just never seeing it.

    If that is how the mechanic works it is even more useless than I had previously thought. Having a low chance to occur would actually increase its use, since again, a vast majority of my AS targets are killed dead. Though I'd rather the effect just came from me and not the target.

    To be fair, though, now that I know I can see ways to use this. It's a free extra hit on the AS target if it doesn't go down. Could also hit a LT/Boss, then attack the minions while they cower. But then, I don't know how long the effect lasts, or if most stalkers would be able to down a couple of minions before the LT/Boss recovers.
    It's not super-powerful, but its far better at terrorizing minions than lts or bosses. Your best bet is to hit the heavy target with your AS. If it kills him, good for you, if not, it'll terrorize quite a few minions for what's usually long enough for you to finish off the big target. If you're a def based secondary, it's even nice in solo EV or AB fights for the -tohit.

    It still makes little thematic sense that it's only effective when you don't kill someone outright. If anything I'd think the guy's friends would be MORE afraid when I just pop out of nowhere and instantly kill their boss.
  22. Shadestorm

    lolincarnates

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Terror1 View Post
    Yeah i just needed to rage a bit
    We all do from time to time. I'll admit I'm fond of a good sharp cheddar myself
  23. So, these "Tanker tuesday" Events are fairly popular. The general idea (well, before they could get respectable damagethrough slotting) was that if you take enough Tankers and put them all together, you end up with enough damage to kill things, and end up going MUAHAHA at all of the aggro sucking going on.

    I started thinking... Stalkers. In the current metagame, a full team of stalkers could provide a really unique experience once a week.

    Call me insane, but I think it may even be possible to tackle some of the rougher content in the game in this fashion.

    Sure, a group of tankers can sit there and suck up damage while sleeping through missions, but imagine how you'd approach content with a full team of stalkers.

    I want to do this. All I have to know is... Who's coming with me?
  24. Shadestorm

    Beacons

    Personally, I hope that doesn't happen. Cooperative zones and grey moralities are bad enough. No reason to further homogenize Heroes and Villains in to one big happy family.

    I'm already miffed that Vigilantes can walk up to me in Grandville and call me names... and somehow I'm magically incapable of stabbing them for it.
  25. Shadestorm

    Inherent Fitness

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Biospark View Post
    It's like the man who loves Cherry Pie, but cannot stand eating with a spoon.
    One day he goes to a diner where the special of the day is Cherry Pie, and when they deliver it to his table they hand him a fork.
    Maybe I don't know enough about cherry pie to get this metaphor... but wouldn't he be happy with the fork?

    Or... was the point that he is happy?

    I'm confused by your metaphor.