UberGuy

Forum Cartel
  • Posts

    8326
  • Joined

  1. I have a very long-time DM/Regen character that existed long before IOs, so I'll try to share some experience. Warning, small book incoming.

    Both Willpower and Regen are excellent at low downtime, being good at filing back your blue and green bars rapidly. DM is a nice combination with either. In a world without fancy IO benefits, DM has been at times considered to be as strong as some entire Scrapper secondaries in terms of the survival benefits it offers you, so it's never a bad choice.

    The biggest thing to remember with DM is that it is pretty single-target focused. Soul Drain and Dark Consumption are AoEs, but they have pretty large recharge times, so they are not "bread and butter" attacks. (They are very good buffs, though!) Shadow Maul is very nice in terms of the damage it does, but its area of effect is kind of small - it can take skill to get more than a couple of foes in its area. It's also vaguely dangerous to a Regen because it locks you into a long animation during which you can't heal. (I still take it on my builds, because, hey, it's better than no AoEs.)

    The single-target thing is important to remember because it puts a limit on one of DM's big benefits in a non-IO world - the toHit debuff it applies to foes. You can't lay that on a lot of foes at a time, because you just can't attack that many at once.

    The good news though is really Siphon Life. This power is almost silly good. Its one of your best damaging attacks and it also heals you. In a world with SOs, I recommend you focus on slotting it as an attack, as the base heal it gives you is decent even with no Heal enhancement. It may seem strange that something like this would be desirable with powesets that also heal you, but Regen does have times where all its clicks are recharging, and being able to get in another heal (while hurting your enemies) doesn't suck at all.

    Basically, WP gets you HP back over time. Regen also gets you some HP back over time, but gets you big chunks of HP back in periodic bursts. Dark Melee can buy you time, which both secondaries will be able to use to refil your green bar.

    In this vein, Touch of Fear is a pretty potent power in an SO build. IO'd DMs or those with less time-sensitive secondaries often skip it, but a couple of hits with it can disable a dangerous foe. In something like a fight with two bosses, this can make a huge difference in the incoming damage you need to heal back. If you can fit it in, I think it's worth considering.

    Since I mentioned WP too, I want to cover the high-level differences in how WP and Regen play. If you already have this info, feel free to stop reading.

    WP is pretty obviously full of toggle and passive powers. The only click powers it has are Strength of Will and its self-rez. Pretty much, you fire up its toggles and go, and the only click you have to worry about being able to get to in a hurry is maybe SoW. WP can't get big chunks of HP back in a hurry, as it lacks a self-heal, but it tends to take a bit less damage than, say, Regen, as it has some damage resistance and some defense to help fend off attacks.

    The more foes you have around a WP, the better it regens HP. This is a little at odds with DM's single-target focus, as the regen improvement in getting more foes around isn't likely to counteract the increase in damage you start taking. WP doesn't have a self heal, so adding Siphon Life is a pretty big deal to a WP.

    Regen is very much about click powers. Getting those clicks back is the key to survival. Hasten is a Regen's friend, IMO. Reconstruction, Dull Pain and Moment of Glory are your go-to survival powers, with Instant Healing letting you enjoy occasional spurts of WP's regen at its best with your other click heals. Compared to WP, a Regen's HP suffer a much greater roller coaster ride. You need to have good reaction times to activate your clicks when you're in a tough fight.

    In my opinion both WP and Regen are excellent sets that play very differently and therefore cater to different preferences. I like Regen, because careful attention to timing my power activations puts my survival in my own hands more so than passives with fixed stats do, which is something I enjoy. I think DM/Regen works nicely, though its probably not the most min/max thing you can build with Regen. (That's probably Katana/Regen.)

    I hope this helps you, and you enjoy what you do build.
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Cyber_naut View Post
    Why do something that literally only annoys players? This 'fix' does nothing to improve the game. I'm still waiting for someone to field an argument to explain how it improves the game, but the only one I'm seeing is that HO's weren't 'intended' to work this way and that they always intended to 'fix' them.
    Honestly, there's little chance anyone can give you an answer you will accept. The very fact that you cannot see how being able to slot things in ways that give benefits which were never intended can be detrimental means that you probably will not see the value in any argument for fixing it.

    The argument "it doesn't break the game" is not a valid argument against fixing things that are working in ways that are not intended.

    Bear in mind, I knew about this bug/exploit/whatever, and after holding off for a long time in case the devs fixed it, I finally started using it fairly shamelessly. I was in no hurry for the devs to fix it, before or after I started using it. I'm not some campaigner for this change.

    At issue here is that you may not agree with other people about what constitutes "harm". If Shields is in every functional way the mitigation peer of SR, and provides offensive benefits that SR does not, why would anyone choose SR other than concept? Situations like that are usually viewed with dismay by good stewards of games they maintain. Maybe you don't care about things like that, but yours is not the only viewpoint that matters. And it's not only the devs that can dislike that scenario - it can create sour grapes for people with long-standing characters of the obsoleted powersets.

    Its absolutely fair to request that the devs evaluate whether any given bug needs fixing, or whether it's actually created/discovered a feature worth keeping. Other than allowing top-end builds to creep higher in their performance envelopes, I'm not clear on what the value of this "bug" as a game feature is, and I'm pretty sure that bugs that improve the top 1% of build or some such is not high on the list of game "features" the devs will think are worth keeping as formal benefits.

    It's also a fair argument to point out that this undercuts one of the last areas in which HOs saw strong, frequent use. Enzymes and Membranes were relatively common elements in high-end builds solely because they enhanced things nothing else could. Now that this is no longer the case, they will be less favored. Others have already mentioned many times in this thread that this is a great opportunity to revisit HOs and give them new or better benefits - reasons for people to favor them again - and I agree.

    If you think that the devs of this or any game should just leave edge problems alone, just because you don't see those problems as causing great harm, you are going to be regularly disappointed. Usually the only devs who leave things like that alone are ones who just don't have the time or resources to address them, not ones who think the problems should be left there for people to use. There are famous exceptions (see: "skiing" in Tribes), but they are just that - exceptions. You shouldn't expect such things in general.
  3. UberGuy

    Scrapper Snipe

    They're pretty awful.

    While it's hardly universal, there's a lot of distaste for snipes even for the AT/powerset combos where they are primary powers. The damage they deal for their total activation time, and the likelihood that they will be interrupted in combat relegates their typical use to an opening attack. Not everyone likes devoting a power pick and 3-5 slots to a power with such a limited role.

    On top of that, the versions given in Patron Pools have much longer total interrupt/activation times than the snipes given to ATs like Blasters or Defenders. They're extend almost to the point of ridiculousness. On Stalkers they once had some favor in PvP since they would crit when Hidden (they might still, I don't track PvP much), but that was about it that I noticed. The Scrapper version doesn't even have that (consistent) benefit.

    In short, unless you have a good set bonus you really want, I wouldn't take them.

    The above assumes performance is more important than concept. Clearly, if concept gets the override then take what you will.
  4. Quote:
    Originally Posted by LaDiva View Post
    Awwwee, so the dream of using them on HO's won't work then ? That's the way it looks, but I'd figure I'd confirm it in case theres a change coming in a new issue or update ?

    *Weeps*
    They don't work on HOs. IOs only. Honestly, I'm not sure if they could ever work on the HOs we have today. Those follow TO/DO/SO-style "plussing" mechanisms, and max out at +3. Given that boosters max out at +5, the systems seem pretty severely incompatible even just at a functional level, let alone whatever may lurk behind their implementations. Based on that, I wouldn't bank on boosters working on HOs unless we get some inkling of it from the devs.
  5. Combining two accounts, I am a (C). My primary account would be a (C) by itself, and my second account would be (D). I tend to concentrate my wealth on my 50s, and my primary account has more of them.
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr_Morbid View Post
    And lets stop saying that BAF is a special case. Yes, the Lt. escapees can't be controlled. But the adds in the other phases can be. And if you're going for the "Keep Em Seperated" badge controllers are great for keeping the adds near their spawn point.
    Um, that still means the BAF is a special case. It contains a phase with uncontrollable, non AV/GM critters in it. That makes it different from all the other trials.

    It's fair to clarify that doesn't mean the whole trial contains uncontrollable critters, but the trial remains a special case.
  7. Quote:
    Originally Posted by SlickRiptide View Post
    Certainly the game has been reduced to that, but it wasn't always the case.
    I simply disagree. I think either you're wrong, or you're reading something into what I said that I didn't mean. And yes, I've read Sam's good explanation of why he thinks that's changed over time.

    This has always been a video game about comic book super heroes (and later super villains). We can disagree about the quality of the way the game's story has presented those things to us, but that has absolutely nothing to do with what genre it represents, and that's what I meant and nothing more (or less). Comic books, even if we restrict ourselves to things like Marvel and DC, have been of sweeping quality either across time or even at the same time across different titles.

    There are concepts and memes, some positive and some negative, found in comic books. Basically what Sam said and I infer you to agree with is that CoH at release contained lots of concepts and memes you liked with or preferred. As time has progressed it has introduced more that you dislike.

    CoH at release was a creative vacuum. We know a lot of lore existed in some form, but it was not present in the game. They mostly laid out a world with a backstory and plopped our characters in it. As time has gone on, people have filled that vacuum with more detailed info. Sometimes they've filled it with lore from the original plan, sometimes they've changed it, for better or worse. (Clearly the Well is considered by some here to be a change for the worse.) It makes complete sense to me to debate the quality of the writing behind some of those additions (well, to a point), but it's impossible to start filling a conceptual vacuum with more concrete info without stepping on some toes when people have written arbitrary back stories for their characters. Yes, I realize more care could have been taken, and that's part of the reason for this thread.

    I'll agree with one thing about the Well storyline. It's more "shepherding" of our characters than it needs to be in terms of back story direction. Unlike some of the vocal posters in this thread, I do not find it very restrictive, but I'll concede that it does require an association some may not want, similar to how CoV's setting requires all villains to associate with Arachnos. I do think the setting would have been better with a more abstract concept behind Incarnate-level power, but I just don't find what we got as objectionable as some.
  8. It's like someone from an alternate universe came here and posted about a CoH that had the same ATs, but that all functioned differently than ours do, and whose players acted differently than ours actually do.
  9. As mentioned, BAF is a special case. In most other contests, the ability to neutralize large spawns of critters is a godsend.

    Even in the BAF, control is useful on the minion escapees. You won't be able to do anything to LTs, but no one can. Focus on controlling the minions - people with high DPS or at least high burst damage need to deal with the LTs.

    If you have no level shifts, well, anyone with no level shifts contributes a lot less on any iTrial, even the two "basic" trials (BAF and Lambda). Getting to +1 helps noticably. Getting to +2 helps a lot. Getting to +3 makes things seem easy.
  10. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kazz View Post
    It isn't a nerf, it's a fix. One that's been coming for a while.
    Can we lay of the semantic arguments beyond "exploit", for which we actually have a developer quote?

    It seems ridiculous to me to argue that point. Something can be both a fix and a nerf. Just because we knew a fix was coming someday has nothing to do with whether or not it "nerfs" the ways in which it was used.
  11. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Trilby View Post
    Does anyone have a build that relies heavily on HOs and tell me what they lost? I'm interested to see how big a nerf it actually is.
    I don't have a shielder, anyone with Def/Rech slotted in Vengeance, or any of the somewhat more esoteric things like HOs in Power Boost/BuildUp.

    The biggest effect on any build of mine has been my melee spec Night Widow, who had three Membranes in Mind Link. If you completely lose the +rech slotting, Mind Link can no longer be "perma", which is an immense impact on the character's performance.

    However, Def/Rech IOs still work. Without too much work you can get close to the Membrane slotting with three Level 50 Def/Rech and one Level 40 That's all the options that are readily available. However, one can close the gap further by going for more extreme components, such as using Enhancement Boosters to make the level 50 pieces into 50+5, and or dip into PvPOs to find a third level 50 Def/Rech IO.
  12. The thing this discussion does for me is make me really dislike auto-hit defense debuffs. The example we come back to a lot (partially my fault, I might have introduced it in the thread) is Arachnos Tarantula Mistresses. Their debuff isn't just auto-hit, it's very large - 30% at even level. Only a defense set with extremely high DDR is going to be able to soak that. If it was the only -def that Arachnos applied, it would be less bad, but Crab Spider critters - common as minions, LTs and bosses - have both ranged and melee defense debuffs which become much more likely to land and cascade the debuffs. The Tarantula debuff is able to be perma (or very close to it) and Tarantula Mistresses can appear multiply in a spawn, with each applying their own debuff.

    IDF have something similar applied by Scryer minions. It's lower -def (around 10% IIRC) though it comes bundled with -DR. I do believe that, among Praetorean critters, only the Scryer IDF and Victoria MkIV War Works apply -def, making cascade failure less likely. For these reasons, I don't find the IDF version quite as devastating as the Arachnos one. If nothing else, minions are easier to defeat quickly, making re-application of the debuff less likely.
  13. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Combat View Post
    I think it is very telling that you use the word exploit.
    When a redname comes along and tells us, point blank, that it's an exploit, everyone has a pass at calling it that, period.

    He went on to qualify that it wasn't a very severe exploit (at least in his opinion), and one for which there would be no explicit attempt to punish players, but that we should expect it to be fixed some day because they considered it an exploit.

    When the people who make the game call it an exploit, whether you agree with them or not is really a moot point. You can disagree with that all you want, but you should not expect anyone to take it seriously.
  14. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow View Post
    The Well of the Furies is different. It is the gateway and plot thread to the whole Incarnate system. There is no way to skip references to the Well, no way to sidestep its influence. The Well of the Furies IS the story. The only way to ignore it is to claim what's written on the screen isn't true, and that's head and shoulders above Origins. If I don't like the Origin of Powers arc, I can simply not do it. If I manage to get to 35 without having ever spoken with Ashley McKnight, the first thing she'll offer me is the arc to enter the Midnight Club, and it turns out I may not even need that if Beta is any indication.

    If I want to ignore origins, I can avoid references to them. If I want to ignore the Well of the Furies, then I have to either not do any Incarnate content or otherwise plug my eyes and ears sing. Your example is not equivalent. As long as the Well is written as the ONLY source of power, this problem will persist. It will only go away if I'm given an alternative which lets me bypass references to the Well, or otherwise if the Well's omni-presence as an all-power source is demoted to A-power source.
    See, I don't make that distinction. It doesn't matter to me that Origins aren't woven into the story. I know they're out there. To me, there's no difference in ignoring something we're told in one place and ignoring something we bump into repeatedly. Both are equivalent "facts" of game lore. Ignoring or accepting them has the same consequences for me in terms of my inner sense of roleplay. If I holistically rejected Origins, that would bug me just as much as holistically rejecting the Well. To refer back to an old thread discussion, the fact that aliens are lumped under the Natural Origin bugs me just as much (probably more) as any of the plot holes in the Well story do. Which admittedly isn't much, but I don't ignore it more because it's not a big part of the game story. It's in there, so it matters to me.
  15. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Megajoule View Post
    Not so. The first time, you said "look, this doesn't make sense and it never made any sense, so just ignore it." When I pointed out that this isn't a practical or satisfying solution (sure we can do that, but we'd rather that it was good so we don't have to), you came back and tried to give a reason why it doesn't and shouldn't be expected to make sense - that this is just a silly video game about silly comic books and we're silly for expecting more. (Clearly we should just mash buttons and go "ooooh" at the flashy lights as our "toons" beat up bad guys.)
    I don't see what you're distinguishing as two different arguments as two different things at all. The second post I made was nothing but a specification of the first post. Your rejection of my second post was just a reiteration of your first rejection, with my specification tacked on the front.

    Me: X
    You: X is dumb because X taken to extreme is obviously unacceptable
    Me: X when Y
    You: X when Y is dumb because X taken to extreme when Y is obviously unacceptable

    You didn't change anything meaningful, because in both cases you reduced my position to ludicrous extreme in order to argue against it.

    Meanwhile, you're apparently completely unwilling to acknowledge that these conclusions you have about the quality of the writing and story are subjective and not absolute. You and I might share the notion that the writing could be better, but I do not share your (and others') assertion that it is crap. (Specifically inferred by me from your reference to it being something that is "shoveled" at us.)

    You're entitled to your opinion. I can't argue with any of you that your opinion is wrong. I can try to point out that I think your opinions are founded on expectations I think are unrealistic for the medium. I honestly don't see any examples in this medium that are significantly better, because unlike you, I don't see the lore we're given here as restrictive. I liked the analogy of the lore as a springboard and not a wall, given above.

    You want an example of lore in this game that's not like that, and that I do dislike actively? The way Villains are beholden to Arachnos for their rise to power. Like Sam says, that Lore I swallow but do not like. The Well of the Furies? Not like that to me.
  16. You just repeated yourself, and completely ignored what I said.

    You aren't "continuing" anything. The "reductio" you're offering here fundamentally the same as what you said the first time, and what I responded to.
  17. I like the way CoH tells its stories - centered on you, and also assuming that your progress through levels is a proxy for the passage of time. When you meet someone at level X+10, they refer to things you might have done with them at level X in the past tense.

    It's not perfect for reasons you mention, but I think much more highly than most of the alternatives I have seen or considered.
  18. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Megajoule View Post
    UG: Telling people "don't look at this too closely" is (a) pretty much futile, considering the sort of people (ie, lore nerds) we're talking about/to; and (b) shouldn't that equally apply to the devs, in the form of "don't explain this too much"?
    Honestly, I don't think it needs to.

    I think this story of the Well is a great example. I happen to think they did a fine job of creating something to try and explain why "Incarnate" level power should be identifiable as something distinct from other supers. I have no problem with it in general because I saw it from the very first descriptions of it as a manifestation of concept that was created by humans (and metahumans), not the other way around. I saw that as suitably abstract. I don't think the devs did what you're saying they did. I think they explained it just enough.

    So where do we draw the line?

    Quote:
    Seriously, what you're saying is only a step away from "none of this matters or makes sense anyway, so stop talking and thinking and caring about it." Consider that this thread started from the premise that "eh, just ignore it" is not a real solution.
    No, that's not what I'm saying. That's the reductio ad absurdum version of my position.

    Everyone has a BS threshold that plots and stories can cross at which point their suspension of disbelief gets shot. The assertion by a lot of people who argue against this stuff seems to me to be that only their threshold is valid - if their suspension of disbelief is broken, the story is unacceptable overall and should be fixed. Some of these people happen to have very low thresholds on top of this.

    What I am trying to argue is that people ought to step back and evaluate whether their threshold really is reasonable, or said another way, whether the threshold the devs hit seems reasonable for the medium in question. This is a video game about comic books. Neither is well known as a bastion of internal plot consistency or literary merit. Granted, some of what is being argued is definitely germane to the context, like whether our characters should be treated as 1st-class protagonists or lackeys, but a lot of it seems to focus on the consistency and quality of the storytelling.

    I don't think being a self-proclaimed lore geek is much excuse for overdoing one's reaction to this stuff. And while I can't claim my (higher) threshold for plot holes and the like is any more correct than someone with a lower one, when they start taking the tone some posters here do about it, I can think they've let it go too far overall.
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow View Post
    You exaggerate. The concept of Dual Origins has been suggested for as long as I remember, and if it weren't for Origin-specific enhancements, that might have happened. Hell, I've suggested we be allowed to type in our origin by hand as plain text, and I don't recall that many people disagreeing, just most taking little interest. Furthermore, origins overlap in a lot of places, so oftentimes it's possible to pick just one origin based on which of the two is more pronounced and stick with that.
    Enhancements only serve to make the problem that comes of examining the system worse. Our characters have one Origin. Just one. If I take my Blaster dude who's concept best matches Science/Tech, and whose origin I chose as Science, I can happily slot him with Science/Mutation DOs. What's that all about, right?

    Quote:
    It's not idea, but it's the best we have, because, really, it just doesn't matter.
    And that is my whole point. About all of it. The Well doesn't matter. Its gloss. Is it gloss that could have been written better? Abso-freaking-lutely. I think some folks just get much too invested in that, to the point that they simply can't accept it because it doesn't work under scrutiny.

    And I just think that's silly.
  20. Quote:
    Originally Posted by CactusBrawler View Post
    That seems to be a move based purely on avoiding the negative press of the game being called 'pay to win', especially given NCSoft's poor history with said pay to win games in the west.
    That seems tenuous at best. That's a nice theory and all, but it hardly has the feel of convincing evidence about it.
  21. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    The thing is, true cascade failure leading to a complete or near-complete loss of damage mitigation can only really happen for powersets that rely exclusively or almost exclusively on defense. Sets with low defense or that don't rely exclusively on defense can have their defense stripped away, but can't have all of their protection stripped away at the same time because it isn't tied up all in defense.
    I'm curious what your thoughts on this topic are for Widows actually, particularly those who go the Widow melee branch and not Fortunata. From earlier comments by others, it might apply to Banes as well. While Widows have DR, it's limited to Psi damage, and they seem to me to rely almost entirely on +defense for mitigation. Well, that and killing stuff. But they have some very low DDR.
  22. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Combat View Post
    Nope, never tried to solo like that on my Widow. He was built as an experiment in damage, not survivability. I don't fancy trying to survive with 0 base resists to non-psy against +4s, even with soft-cap (don't widows have scaling resists like SR? I forget). I have only tried +4 soloing on my TW/Elec Brute and my shielder, and maybe will try with my crab.
    Well, I have. Against most stuff, it's a breeze. Against stuff like Arachnos and even Longbow, it's hard. It takes longer. I have to think. I ... sometimes have to use inspirations!

    The point is that a lot your posts in this thread comes of making Shields sound somehow second-rate and in need of a buff, and based on other play experience, I don't think that sounds reasonable, unless "has 1-2 foes that might make you use inspirations occasionally" translates into "second-rate" or "needs a buff". I think a lot of other people here share the same kinds of experience I have, and that's why so many people have responded negatively to your stance here. They're arguing less against your feelings on the matter and more against the assertions your feelings seem to be leading you to make.

    None of us have any place telling you what to think of your shielder after this change, but when it comes to the qunatitative arguments and how those translate into real play experience, I think it makes sense that some folks are arguing with you. Separate from whether that argument itself seems likely to sway you personally (it doesn't) a lot of people post rebuttals to claims they feel are inaccurate or untrue, just so others aren't mislead by them.
  23. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Combat View Post
    I have a widow too. She has something like 75% melee defense, 62% R/A.
    Did you ever stop to think that maybe not everyone has that? I can tell you that the numbers you're quoting are ahead of those I have by a good 10% in every position. My Widow doesn't have Weave, for example. Frankly, she doesn't need it.

    Quote:
    I'd say a widow can get to the point that they ignore a few defense debuffs.
    Even your build couldn't absorb a single +3 Tarantula Mistress's debuff. It's minus 30% if they're even level with you. That means a +3 is going to hit you with a 39% debuff, which your resistances will reduce to 28.8%. One hit with that and, yeah, you'll have just barely over softcapped melee, but now your R/A defenses are around 36%, so that all those Crabspider Longfang dudes are going to start hitting you with ranged -def debuffs.

    So either you don't solo your Widow on +4/x8 versus Arachnos (and maybe IDF, who have a smaller but more common auto-hit defense debuff), or you know this situation is manageable (though challenging) and don't want to admit it.
  24. I know someone who doesn't even post and very rarely reads the forums who has over 100B in Inf, obviously not counting items either stored or slotted. His net worth is a lot higher than that if you include theoretical sale value of stuff, because he's got hundreds of valuable items stored.

    There's a lot of money out there.
  25. Folks, anytime we look too hard at mapping systems meant to set boundaries in a game system and looking at how they would map into "real life" such as we might create in fiction, be it canon or fan-fic, we always find that they don't work. Sure, some creations map better than others, but I have never found a game system that divided people, powers, origins, or anything into neat categories that actually didn't break down if you really thought about it too hard.

    What that doesn't mean is that no such system should be created for games or related media. It just means we're expected to have either really resilient suspension of disbelief, or just expected not to think this hard about this kind of stuff (which is sort of the same thing).

    Long before the Origin of Power story that so many people here rail about, the Origin system never made sense even for existing characters. Is my Blaster who was dunked in coolant infused with Portal Corp energies that gave him Ice Blast powers, but who is a brilliant engineer who builds his own Devices weapons a Science or Technology character? What if his ice powers were a genetic mutation he was born with, and his secondary came from studying magic? What if you have a railgun engraved with accuracy-increasing runes?

    The point is that even something as 0-day as the original Origin system made no sense if you thought about it too hard. Nothing in stuff like this does.

    It's just my opinion, but if your roleplay sense of this stuff starts getting in the way of your ability to enjoy the game for what it is, I think you're doing it wrong.