Sunstroke

Originally Posted by AquaJAWS

I don't understand why everyone seems to think that if a villainous archetype goes heroic that they would have to have access to the ancillary power-sets, or if a heroic archetype going villainous will get access to the current patron power-sets. They may add more power-sets in the patron/ancillary area but I highly doubt that all the sudden a Blaster will get access to the Mu Mastery patron power-sets. Some of the schemes people come up with for this just seem very over complicated.

My prediction is that one of two things will happen:

1) They will just remove the arc completion requirement from the patron power-sets so they are essentially the same as the ancillary power-sets in that they just open up at level 41. The arcs will remain to actually do, maybe with a respec reward upon completion, but you won't have to complete them to get access to the powers. With the current patron power-set included as being able to be respec'd, the patron arc completion is less significant before and doesn't really hold the same meaning other than you did 1 of 4 arcs, when before it was arc XYZ got you ABC powers. That could be a sign of them just removing the requirement all-together.

2) They will just introduce heroic equivalents for the rogue villainous archetypes to do unlocking patron arcs for. The power sets will be identical to the current Mu/Leviathan/Mace/Soul Mastery. The patron could be the praetorian versions of the patrons. Missions could be nearly identical as well. Rogue heroic archetypes just have their ancillary pools open up at level 41 as they do now.

The whole idea that because a Blaster is villainous they now have to chose between the Dominator patron pools, or because a Mastermind is heroic they get access to the Tanker ancillary powersets (or whatever ATs you pick, just using as examples) sounds overly complicated and prone to bugs and balance issues since the current sets are balanced and designed for their specific archetypes.

I doubt they would give more respecs to us every time we switch sides so change out the ancillary and patron pools based on our morality because that would kill their micro-transaction setup they currently have for it. Why pay $10 when you could just switch sides and get a freespec.

Originally Posted by ThePill

I can kinda see that too. But, for me, the underlying idea is that it's something you gain from actions. It's notoriety of your actions that earns you those things or access to better enhancements or costume change. So, if you're a villain that's just turned hero, you might have a hard time getting respect from cops, people distrust you, scientists don't trust you enough to give you enhancements. Same goes for heroes turned villains too. Other villains don't know where you stand, so you have to earn your way up so that Arachnos trusts you enough to give you access to those enhancements etc.

Originally Posted by ThePill

I can almost see them taking the influence/infamy from a character. That makes a bit of sense, or at least make the inf non-transferable. A hero turned villain shouldn't be able to take advantage of their past influence. And vice versa. They should have to earn their own infamy.

Originally Posted by Myopic_Aardvark

Erm, no. Most (all but Jack and one other I believe) of the dev team at that time stayed here.

Originally Posted by That_Ninja

Uhh, dude, we got the cast off developers.

Originally Posted by Rosie_ODonnell

Actually the previous lead developer for CoX is the current lead developer for CO. That's a pretty important role.

Originally Posted by Perfect_Pain

If CO was a better game, maybe they would have something to worry about.