konshu

[ QUOTE ]
http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/CoH_Accomplishment_Badges

I think the contacts should be more streamlined to that... and I think all those "extra" contacts should give 25% more exp for doing the entire arcs.

That would be more exciting.

[/ QUOTE ]

More xp doesn't excite me. But yeah, if I was a dev who was trimming out the fat I'd try to highlight arcs that give badges or temp powers.

I recently read somewhere on the forums that at Comic Con the dev panel said they were going to do a revamp of CoH. Can anyone confirm this news?

[ QUOTE ]
The strangest objection from reviews I've read is to stories that don't follow canon lore.

[/ QUOTE ]

First, I would draw a line to differentiate between criticism and condemnation. Just because a critic mentions some technical factor, it doesn't mean there is implied condemnation.

For instance, if a reviewer mentions that a mission doesn't follow canon it isn't necessarily a condemnation. It could just be stated as a technical point. But it may be taken as condemnation by an arc writer who is too easily offended.

Also, maybe a critic has a preference for canon-related arcs, but it still doesn't mean all non-canon work is automatically condemned. So they may not *like* that aspect of the arc, but it doesn't mean you're being downgraded because of it.

Of course, sometimes it is clear that condemnation is the critic's intended point. Not necessarily condemnation of the arc writer, but condemnation of whatever technical point is being discussed. Personally, I think it's better for critics to just mention the technicals and not assign values to them, and thus avoid condemnation, but not everyone sees it this way.

If you've had some aspect of your arc condemned, remember it's not the end of the world; it's whatever you make of it. You can feel offended by it or not, and it's better if you decide to not be offended.

If you think the reviewer is open to feedback, and you feel justified in what you did, you can explain to them the technical reason for why you did the thing that earned you condemnation.

In my opinion, explanation or moderate rebuttal is fine, as it can broaden the perspective of a reviewer and audience. However, don't be thinking your replies and explanations will win the reviewer's approval, and don't expect you'll win the approval of that reviewer's audience. Recognize that people tend to stick with the opinions they have, and repeated attempts to get them to change their mind are typically seen by them as annoying and stupid behavior.

Critics call it as they see it. Arc writers need to make what they think works. If the criticism you get is useful, then use it. Otherwise just move on.

And if what you're looking for is approval, then just look inside yourself. If you approve of what you've done then be happy. Don't make your approval of your project be dependent upon some other person's approval. And certainly don't wait for *everyone* to approve your work, or you'll be waiting forever.

Related to the OP, I think both positive and negative arc reviews can be allowed, but my preference will be for technical reviews.

[ QUOTE ]

Try a search using the term [LFMA], that is a tag folks use for lowbie friendly mission arcs.

Now they may not be exactly right for the sub 5s, but I have run a good deal of them with that tag using a range from 1 through to 15 or so without any major issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I miss the memo again? I thought the lowbie flag was LBMA.

[ QUOTE ]
I know this one will get flamed, but here goes. I think not only is CoH outdated and needs revamped, but I think there are just to many zones in general. I think they should just eliminate 2-3 of older least used zones. Say they got blown off the map by Rikti or something.

Then, with less zones, start redoing the remaining zones one zone at a time and one enemy faction at a time, one TF at a time.

CoV is fine IMO and doesn't need any zones, missions, or enemies revamped. It is newer and the graphics look better than CoH, the missions and SFs are laid out better and the enemies look more details. CoV is more quality over quanity and I think CoH could be revamped to also follow that strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't entirely agree, but I wouldn't flame you. I think the problem is that in CoH you have arcs and task forces that send you into the little used zones. So if you remove the little used zones, you have to try to track down all the places where that zone is referenced and make changes. It can be done, but ... what do you gain?

The more practical solution, in my opinion, is to make new content that properly uses the zones. Most of the time I don't care how many people are in a zone with me, I just want to be doing content that truly relates to that zone. For example, it is more thematic for me to fight Skulls in KR, since they practically own that zone. I suppose I could also fight Skulls in Perez, since the gang originated in the area of Perez called "The Boneyard," but ... the devs never wrote any missions for that.

Little used zones - like Perez, Skyway, and Boomtown - need to have content written that makes use of their unique characteristics. It shouldn't be that big of a deal. The devs could assign a person to spend a month on each "dead" zone making improvements, but for whatever reason they prefer to either do nothing or "go big." So instead of waiting a month, we have to wait for years before they do something.

Boomtown, Perez, and Skyway have all been dead since 2006, if not earlier, so I would say the devs' strategy of "go big or don't go at all" sucks.

As for CoV, I like the way it was done, but I'd played all the content many times over by the end of 2006. It's now 2009 and I can barely stand to set foot on redside because it's so overly familiar. What they created back in 2006 was vastly superior to what we have blueside, yet I find most of my time is spent on the blueside these days doing TFs for TF Commander on all my toons. (Yes, it's the same TFs over and over, but I don't play the game for content any more, due to the lack thereof.)

[ QUOTE ]
So I've heard talk about this set being the "best" (Rad/Sonic Defender) or that set being the "best" (Fire/Kin) for years now.

I don't want the best, I'm looking for a CHALLENGE. So, denizens of the CoH community, what set is the WORST?


[/ QUOTE ]

I think in general the hardest ATs to work with would be soloable defs and corrs, as they are designed to shine in supplementary positions, and they get harder if you skip Stamina and vet powers. I have a few of these.

My ice/traps corr, for example, is fun to play, but challenging. Since she has no Fitness she has to be sure she doesn't bite off more than she can chew. I play her as a jokey villain - kind of like a villainous Inspector Clouseau - so the face plants are all part of the gag.

Instead of Fitness she has Presence pool, which fits with her background as a 2nd generation French-Canadian terrorist. She Challenges to draw foes onto Trip Mines, and Panics to buy time to set off Poison Trap.

I have 4 macros for Challenge allowing me to give a few colorful pseudo-French taunts to foes when I'm teaming. (BTW, this toon is not meant to be offensive to French-Canadians. So far all my French and Canadian teammates have given the toon a thumbs up.)

I mention all this to show how playing a villain can be fun. But of course YMMV.

My worst def so far? That would have to be my sonic/sonic def with no Fitness. I haven't figured out how to enjoy that one yet. I just respeced again, so we'll see, but right now I'm liking other toons better.

[ QUOTE ]
Content you've never played before on a character is still new content.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say this is true up to a point.

Newer content often contains improvements not found in older content. Basically, in my mind I'm comparing pre-CoV to post-CoV, so when I'm thinking of old I mean OLD. As in "before 2005."

To provide a few examples ...

Newer arcs are less likely to contain superfluous hunts and errands.

Newer content is more likely to feature custom heroes and villains (as opposed to generic bosses).

Newer content typically features more complications / objectives in each mission. (This is not true in each case, or course, but in general newer missions are more sophisticated.)

Newer content often has updated artwork, newer maps, better special effects. (Compare, for example, the costumes of the Outcasts and the Legacy Chain.)

Newer arcs often have more complex stories.

[ QUOTE ]
Real criticism is hard to come by a lot of the time. People often feel that if they criticise someone's work that they may upset or offend them.

I think this latest "problem" kinda proves that. A lot of artists, for whatever reason, cannot accept criticism on any level. Worse still are their fans who seem to be infinitely more rabid when it comes to defending what they like.

And that isn't just AE, or CoH or anything. That's with every single thing out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Many people aren't looking for criticism, they're looking for approval.

[ QUOTE ]
There has to be a balance in all these things. Giving an arc 4 or 5 stars and saying "its cool" is just as worthless as giving it 1 or 2 and saying "it sucks".

Well thought out criticism can be very helpful to improving the work overall. But when giving reasons, if it's done in a very negative "this is pure crap" sort of way it will simply invalidate any advice given. If advice and criticism are done in a constructive, respectful way (even if it points out a hundred flaws) it is far more likely to be taken seriously and to have an impact on the work in question. This is true of critiques in any media.

[/ QUOTE ]

Evidently there's some backstory on this OP that I'm not aware of. But - IMHO - there are definitely examples of positivism and negativism in arc reviews that prevent those reviews from being as helpful as they could be, to both players and arc makers.

Personally, I tend to find the overly positive reviews more difficult to deal with. With an overly negative review I feel I can parse out more easily which things are personal dislikes and which things are truly technically bad. An overly positive review, on the other hand, glosses over the problems so when you play the arc you find yourself cheated by the misrepresentation.

I think reviewers should be free to declare their opinions based upon their tastes and preferences. But I would ask that they also help everyone out by laying out the technicals of an arc (spelling, rational storyline, how challenging is it really, etc.), and say a few things in each review that shows you appreciate other viewpoints and tastes. I mean ... if you're spending the reader's time talking about your own preferences, it seems diplomatic to tip your hat to what may be other people's - including the reader's - preferences. Clearly there is a wide range of tastes out there regarding AE arcs.

I think if *I* was giving reviews, I'd have to avoid rating them with stars. Frankly, I don't like much that I've seen in the AE so far, so my star ratings would be low and it would just serve to make people feel bad. However, I could talk about what I thought worked and didn't work in the arc, and I think I could do it in a useful and respectful manner.

If I came across an arc that I did not like at all, I would not publish a review of it. Some people may feel it is their responsibility to do so, but I feel like I need to be able to say maybe one positive thing for each negative thing in order to be polite, so if I can't find enough positive things to say I just wouldn't say anything.

After all, this is just a game. We're not reviewing someone's competency for a life and death situation, or even just for money. I don't see a need to "protect" the public (from things that don't appeal to me) by humiliating someone.

[ QUOTE ]
There's nothing wrong with most of those zones. What exactly should they be doing to "revamp" them?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not all of the zones need things done to them, in my opinion.

Boomtown should get some sort of renewal, and theoretically work has already been done toward that - it just hasn't been finished and released yet.

Additionally, little things can be done to improve play in certain zones. IP could potentially benefit from another train terminal and maybe better localization of mission doors within an arc.

Skyway could use something to renew interest, as it sees little action outside of transiting TF teams.

AE buildings could be removed from all zones designed for play under level 10. So AE could be removed from Atlas, Galaxy, KR, and Mercy. I guess my decision would be to leave the AE in Port Oakes, as it is difficult for even a veteran lowbie to enter the AE building in Cap, and the non-AE players in Cap may already suffer from overuse of their AE.

On redside, the helicopter near the ferry on Nerva could allow transit to a new copter near Primeva. That would get players entering the zone up to Primeva faster, and from the hospital back to Primeva missions as well. Those already at Primeva could take the copter back down to the south part of the map to sell and store things at their base.

[ QUOTE ]
While we are getting all these great and wonderful things. There are some parts of this game that need to be revamped, for lack of a better term.

I would *pay* for some of our existing zones to be Super up abit. If it came in a boxed expansion, or a Zones Booster pack... I would buy it for sure.

Granted if it came in a FREE ISSUE, I would likely be all the more happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree with this. About a month after I started playing, around May in '05, I could see how so many, many things even then needed polish, updating, and replacement. If the invitation was there, I'd work for free to fix it.

Yes, the devs have made various changes and improvements over the years, but they never quite addressed things the right way. For example, all of those dumb errand missions - if you play the game, you know the ones! These should have been made optional years ago. The code is there to do it, so what's the problem? Let's get it done! It would probably take one person two days, max - blueside and redside. Also, Hollows should have had a field hospital from day one, and KR should have had stores. Why did we have to wait YEARS for this to happen when the changes were so easy to make? They put a second train terminal in Skyway; when do we get a second one in IP ... a much larger zone? If for some reason you can't make both of them on the Green Line - enabling travel from north to south in the same zone - put the new one near the KR exit and on the Yellow Line. That would at least help with travel relating to Sister TF and first respec trial. Heck, I guess if it is possible you could even put in both train stations; the 2nd Green Line terminal could be just north of the Bricks exit. Alternatively - or additionally - you could prioritize the doors in IP so that missions in an arc are grouped to occur more in the north or more in the south.

Content-wise, there are a lot of changes that would be worthwhile. The Transcendence trial desperately needs a re-write, for example. So does the Posi TF. There are lots of things like that. And you could definitely enrich the mission content in all the old zones without violating the canon; there's a ton of room to squeeze in refreshing new slants on the old stories, and there's a ton of existing lore that is there but under-represented.

One place you could start with a revamp would be with removing all or nearly all of the hunt missions. If you want to provide zone hunts as an alternative to door mishes, then take each of the Security Chiefs and make them contacts who give zone hunts. It's a sensible change, and I'd estimate it would take maybe two days to revise all the old content for the first five zones on blueside (and that's including re-writes on mission intros given by contacts).

So what are we talking about ... maybe a week to make some sweeping changes to old blueside content? Making the errands optional (on redside too), removing the hunts, and assigning hunts to the security chiefs. Heck, depending on what's involved, the same person might even be able to place one or two new train terminals in IP as well.

Unfortunately, the devs seem to be of the mentality that once something is released it is engraved on impervium and never to be revisited. Instead, they should be thinking of all their work as being like perishable fruit, which is closer to the truth. It will only be good for so long, and then it needs to be updated or replaced. It would be acknowledging the reality of the situation.

And yes, they can make new zones, new arcs, and do it about as easily as they can re-write old zones/arcs, but if the old material is beginning to stink, please refresh it.

If Paragon Studios was to conduct a poll on whether they should take an issue to do a revamp on the older parts of the game, I think they'd see the players want it. Especially if they talk about making the hunts and errands optional. However, I think the better strategy for them would be to have one or two people employed full time to go back through the older content and continually tweak it, re-writing and revamping as needed, just to keep it all fresh.

[ QUOTE ]
Last time I tried this, I ran with mostly 31-35s who were actually hoping to get a level or two out of the task force. We also did not have a debuffer. We got frustrated waiting for a GM after two of them spawned in the first mission and we couldn't scratch them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi, Heraclea ... I was with you on that TF. We actually managed to get nearly all the way through the second mission ("Defeat All Forces in Lab") in KR before we were forced to abandon it.

I mention this because the release notes for Test Server Build 19.20090716.0 say the devs have fixed the first mission, but they don't say anything about removing level 40 PPs from the rest of the TF.

[ QUOTE ]

Task Force
<ul type="square">[*]Manticore Task Force: 1st Mission no longer spawns level 40 Paragon Protector Elites (This is a level 30-35 Task Force)[/list]

[/ QUOTE ]

Mmm ... I just tried to do this TF on live the other day. There were level 40 Paragon Protectors in more than just the first mission. We defeated the ones in the first mission, but were unable to complete the TF due to level 40 PPs with difficult power combinations in a later mission (in KR).

We also noticed that the bugged PPs developed a stutter where they would wiggle back and forth. When in this state they would not attack player characters except in response to an attack. This wiggle or stutter did not appear related to map geometry or power effects. We decided Crey had made a bad batch.

[ QUOTE ]
Does anyone know what it will be yet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. It's an automatic leveling of all your toons to level 50 so you don't have to go through the hassle of spending hours in AE. Unless you want to.

Now you are free to explore the end game with all of your toons!

[ QUOTE ]

A sunburnt Defender: The Lifeguarder. He's rad/sonic, acquiring his skills ultimately from his experiences as a lifeguard at the beach (i.e. way too much sun [radiation] and yelling at the kids to get out of rip tides [sonic]).


[/ QUOTE ]

Hard to say.

Is there an origin power that seems more appropriate for him? (Tranq, throwing knife, or mutagen capsules)

That could guide your choice.

[ QUOTE ]

1) A way to scale a mission while in Test Mode for different size teams and difficulty settings.


[/ QUOTE ]

Those would be some handy buttons to have. I second the notion!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Couldn't you, y'know, take that ranting someplace elsewhere?

[/ QUOTE ]

This.

These point by point, walls of text explanations of what Venture didn't understand about your "awesome" arc bug me to no end. It was said that the best thing you could say in response is, "Thanks for the review," and that was it.

Still, it's up to Venture to speak out against them. This is his thread, and if the inane chatter doesn't bother him, then there's nothing I can say.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's natural that the authors of the arcs want to talk about them. If they're looking to get constructive criticism from Venture (and I think they are and do), then the next logical step after a review is to try to clarify things to the point where you can see what needs to be done to make improvements.

However, out of respect for the forum/thread, you don't want to take up too much space or attention.

It seems to me that if there is any defending to be done it should be done once, and briefly. I think it is possible a person could have a defense that is a valid feedback to Venture as a reviewer.

Now ... if the whole point of getting your arc reviewed by Venture is merely to get more hits ... then I can easily see why you'd just thank him and move on. In that case you don't need to argue any points and you don't need to understand anything.

I've run this arc ("A South Side Story") several times, but the last time I noticed something odd. There was a huge and silent ambush that came after we attacked the Hellion leader (Fire Fist).

The thing is ... there is no ambush called for. I've checked multiple times. There are two ambushes in the spec. The first occurs after the defeat of the front battle, and the second occurs after the defeat of T. Jones.

You were right, Venture. There is an ambush. But it's a MA bug.

[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
The Hellion leader turned out to be a custom mob, "Fire Fist", whose info said he preferred to use his martial arts training. He never got into melee range so mostly used Fire Blasts on me, did throw a shuriken once. When he got low an ambush wave spawned silently and hit me in the back, which made things "interesting" for a bit but I pulled it off.

[/ QUOTE ]

There actually is no ambush or any other trigger on Fire Fist. It must have been a patrol that came up behind you, hence the silence.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

I see a moral/theme in this story, everything is tied together (I think quite well).

Possible themes/morals:

Trust is earned not given... Did the character earn the trust of the contact through the characters actions in the story and was in turn entrusted with the "Order's" secret - YES

That no matter what happens in life, one must retain his humanity... The vampires daily unending internal struggle to deal with what they are - YES

Even Villains have standards... Displayed by the contact's wish to not kill innocents - YES

Love arises in the strangest places... Well the contact seems to come like the character in a rather romantic way by the end of the arc (and yes she is bisexual.. in case you are playing a female character). - YES

That is why I don't agree with Venture on "just a bunch of stuff that happened".


[/ QUOTE ]

I've not played your arc, but in your story did you create any sort of conflict - that is played out, not just implied - about any of these proposed themes? A situation in which the subject of one of these themes is focused upon and challenged?

You have a lot of themes here, and I'm thinking that the problem is that most of them are implicit rather than being explicit. You might strengthen the story by picking one or two of these themes and dramatizing them. (Again, I've not played your arc, maybe you did that.)

"Trust is earned, not given" - Is there a scene where this trust is challenged; that is, where something casts the trust in doubt? To create a conflict, and dramatize this theme, there should probably be something that puts the trust in doubt, and then some event where the trust is justified. In that way we show that the trust is "earned." Running with a premise of "Okay, you do this for me and I'll trust you" isn't sufficiently dramatic. There needs to be an arc (up/down movement). So if you begin with a state of trust ("I'm giving you this mission because I trust you to an extent"), then the next phase must be one of failure and distrust ("I don't know if I can trust you, because of X.") This is then resolved with earned trust ("Okay, I see why things happened that way, and it turns out I really CAN trust you.")

It is much easier, by the way, to have your themes operating on NPCs and not on the PC. So you might create a 3rd party whose trust is in doubt (and who must earn it).

"One must struggle to retain humanity" - Again, this must be dramatized. What is the challenge to one's humanity? How is this played out in the choices given? Where is the point where the outcome of the struggle to retain humanity comes into doubt? How is this struggle resolved?

"Even villains have standards" - You can probably see where I'm going with this. Is this standard demonstrated, and demonstrated in a way that provides dramatic punch? Or is it just a rule that is stated and followed?

"Love arises in the strangest of places" - I think to make this theme emerge, you'd first have to take some pains to create the impression that this "strangest of places" is hard and loveless. You can't just assume that the player sees it that way at the outset. It has to be acted out in some way - or several ways - to create a strong impression. It's only when you have the audience thinking one way about a thing that can you create an impact by giving a twist.

Also, it would be more dramatic if the love was revealed at the end as a motive for NPC actions that have already been witnessed.

[ QUOTE ]

I play on PUGS quite a bit, and the only thing I've noticed that is different are all the new players that are returning to this game. If new subscriptions == ruining the game, then yes, I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

It could also be that since you're in Atlas now from levels 1-50 you're just meeting more of the new players.

[ QUOTE ]

My biggest gripes with the game, that have been solved a bit by AE, are in no particular order:

1) The pre-Stamina/pre-SOs game: After almost 4 years, this is an annoying-at-best, painful-at-worst experience even using all the endurance and power management tools I know before this point. AE not only gets teams together relatively quickly (in my expereince), but the leveling speed even through "story-focused content" is higher than the "RL" game. Not only does this mean more endurance fill-ups as you play and level, but simply getting passed some of the endurance choke points faster.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, I've been with the game for 4 years and my favorite part of the game is the lower levels where play is more challenging due to power limitations. We also have the more inspiring foe groups and storylines at low level. From 1-20 we get the Skulls, Hellions, Circle, Outcasts, Vahz, and Tsoo (plus the "meh" Council, Clocks, Trolls, Lost, Igneous, Raiders, Freaks, Family, Arachnos and Warriors). Some players may like the foe groups introduced at the higher levels (Malta, Nemesis, Carnies, Crey, Knives), but they seem less enthralling to me.

The later part of the game, after level 30, is where teams trash whole mobs in seconds, then dogpile on the boss/EB/AV. It's like farming. It just doesn't seem as well balanced to me. Also, especially if I'm playing a controller or defender, I've got like 20 different powers to trigger by that point, not counting all the temps.

So I'm not looking to bypass the early levels of play - heck, it goes so quickly anyway now that we have basically zero debt and accelerated xp. I just wish we could get more and better content at the lower levels, from say 1-30.

[ QUOTE ]

2) Travel between zones for some story arcs: This is primarily a Hero-side issue, and they have been trying to alleviate it somewhat as they add new contacts. There is nothing worse in the game than getting a bunch of "travel to x zone to deliver or pick up y package," then having to go back to z contact to get the next mission and promptly getting sent another 3 or 4 zones away because they do not like you enough for you to call them yet. Not everyone has the convenience of a well-developed SG to abuse the porters and not everyone is a high enough level to be Entrusted with the Secret (the O-Zone portal seriously became one of my favorite temp powers because of how much travel it cut out for me). I do not know specifics off the top of my head (unfortunately), but I highly doubt any of you are going to argue the existence of these instances with me.

Not only does AE all but remove these missions, but since you can use AE to put all the missions in one zone, you can remove the need for a travel power (almost, some of the maps are still more convenient with one), allowing more space in a build.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'll completely agree that the devs expletived the players early and often with stupid and useless travel in the original content of the game. However, I don't like AE either. It's a choice between two extremes: spend all your time traveling, or spend zero time traveling. I prefer the middle ground.

I think it would be great if players could take their arcs out of the AE building and place the missions at different doors (vans, helicopters) in the many zones. We'd do it right, too. The travel would be part of the story. I think we lose a lot of the flavor of the game by focusing on play in the AE building.

The river in the Hollows known as the Red River, and there is also a Red River in Founders. Is there some kind of error here? These are not the same river; they are in totally non-adjacent places.

Is there an explanation for this confusing situation? Or is it just the way it is, and all the locals know there is a "north" Red River and a "south" Red River?

[ QUOTE ]
I still have a problem. I've done everything I can think of to fix it.

Every time the updater starts it wants to re-write some pigg files. When it gets to the geom.pigg file the updater crashes. Consistently.

It's not a file space issue or anything else I can think of. I've been able to access the test server just fine in the past, and I've accessed it since i15 came out. But that last bad patch seems to have done me in. I've reloaded the CohTest folder from my City of Heroes folder, made it past various hurdles (it still likes to erase all my pigg files the first go around), and then I finally get the updating to something manageable, like just under 300M, and it gets as far as geom.pigg and quits.

I hope the devs haven't stopped working on this updater issue, as I don't consider it resolved yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've resolved my problem and have been able to access the Test server for the last few days.

The problem was that I needed to increase my TCP send packet size. I play the game via WINE on Ubuntu (Linux), and was able to get the help I needed from the WineHQ CoH forum.

To increase my send packet size and get the updater working right, I opened a terminal window and typed the following 2 lines:

sudo -s
echo 4096 131072 4194304 &gt; /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_wmem

And that was it.

I've been running on Test for the last couple of days and have been able to resume downloading patches with no problem.

[ QUOTE ]

1) What is Lady Grey's first name?


[/ QUOTE ]

Um ... her first name is "Lady."

[ QUOTE ]

Interesting, except in the case that I tested these under I was the only player in the mission so there was no one else to be linked to. The Thermal never healed me or herself and never put fire shields on me, the only thing she did was give me Thaw and Forge once the moment I rescued her then never re-applied them no matter how long I sat around waiting.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I'm not doubting your experience with the Thermal critter, I have done one mission with a thermal/fire manip. critter ally, and I *was* given thermal shields and one or more of the forge/cm (or whatever) type buffs. I was also hit on occasion with the heal other and/or healing aura type thermal power. For me the AI seemed to work reasonably well.

However, someone else who played the same mish separately from me (Venture, I believe) reported that the same critter ally never used their Thermal powers.

It could have something to do with play style. I would pause between fights to allow the critter ally time to cycle out of the attack mode and into the support mode - just guessing that it was necessary.

[ QUOTE ]

"Likely" and "probably" don't really cut it for me. And as for 3k Kelvin, he's more like hired muscle than any sort of leader. Yes, he's an EB, but he doesn't really have much of a Hellion feel to him. And if they supposedly have a leader, I'd like to meet/face him in-game. I like resolution, I want the Hellions and Skulls to get some sort of story similar to the Outcasts with Frostfire. As it is now, both groups just kinda fall beneath your notice at a certain point and you never really deal with them again.

[/ QUOTE ]

I pretty much agree with you. The Skulls and Hellions - and Outcasts - even though they are low level foes, they could have their stories fleshed out a bit. But I wouldn't want everything to have a resolution; there always needs to be a bit unexplained or unexplored for future development.

The leaders of the Skulls do actually make appearances in some of the canon mishes, for some players. The Skull founders and leaders are the Petrovic brothers, known as Marrow Drinker and Marrow Snap. You wouldn't know this from just playing the game, though. If you came across either of these in a mission the moment was probably lacking in significance as they were likely encountered as normal-looking Skull lieuts at the end of a mish.

The way I used them in my AE arc ("A South Side Story") was open ended (they do a cameo), but they are visually distinct from the rest of the Skulls, obviously more powerful, and they are presented throughout as being the leaders of the Skulls. All of which is different from the way it was delivered to us in the game, but I feel it is actually more consistent with the Skull story and player expectations.

When I get more AE slots, I'd like to get more into the backgrounds of the Hellions and Outcasts. What's interesting is how little development there has been on the stories of these groups compared to how much "mind share" they possess. I mean, pretty much every toon that is rolled up fights Hellions and Outcasts, and everyone knows who these groups are, yet in the game they make up the tiniest percentage of content. If you don't count Billie Heck's bonus arc (which few people know of or play), there are basically no real arcs for Hellions - just a couple of scanner/paper type missions from Azuria and other early contacts. And even though Flux sends you to fight Frostfire, the founder of the Outcasts, there are no real Outcast arcs aside from that one ... and that one features Trolls at least as much as Outcasts.

When you think about how much mileage Marvel got from Hellion-themed characters like the Ghost Rider and Son of Satan, and how much material they've mined from the Outcast-like Xmen (and all their derivatives), you'd think more could be done with these groups.

Game lore basically insinuates that the Hellions were entirely created by Odysseus Hill selling magical artifacts to a minor street gang that eventually became the Hellions. To me that is a fairly lame origin story, and preferably would be only a fraction of the true tale. Like ... maybe that is the way Hill sees it, and that's a valid view from his perspective, but it's not the whole story.

The way I'd handle it is to give the Hellions multiple benefactors (like Hill), a weak distributed leadership that is always seeking alliances and benefactors, and a variety of short-term goals depending upon the particular leader / benefactor. I'd also give the group a better origin, one that is uniquely theirs, and then set up the Warriors / magic item trade as just another alliance made by a faction of the Hellions.

As for the Outcasts, it seems to me there is a lot of room for storytelling there. What are Frostfire's personal goals? How does he recruit and maintain control over the Outcasts? Why are they found in Steel Canyon and the Hollows? How did the Outcasts begin their battles with the Trolls, and was there ever a time when Outcast and Troll worked together? And so on.

There is so much fertile material the devs left untouched or underexploited in their rush to get the game or the issue out the door. And, in my opinion, most of the foes in the game are handled from a game developer's mentality (oh, we need to create another level for our superhero version of Frogger or Ms Pacman) and not from a comic book or storytelling mentality.