I5

[ QUOTE ]

Croatoa, I'll outlevel it before my contacts give me a contact there probably. Why did you make this almost the same levels as Striga I'll never understand. We want to play it but the majority of the SG can't get the initial contacts and almost all our defender team is 25.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just wanted to point out that you can go to Croatoa at level 25 and talk to the mayor NPC and start the Croatoa missions. Just as you can start the Hollows content at level 5 just by visiting Lt Wincott, even if your first level 5 contact hasnt sent you to Wincott yet.

What I dont get is why the break in Croatoa content. I hit 25 with my Stone/Stone tank and immediately went to Croatoa to play the "new" stuff. I had finished the first three contacts by the time I was about halfway through level 26. Now, for some silly reason, I have to wait until level 30 to restart the Croatoa story line.

It had crossed my mind that if I had repeated the "Stop 30 Fir-bolgs from escaping" 100 times instead of getting a level 48 AR/Dev blaster to guard the door for me while I cleared the map on my second try, I might have been able to seemlessly proceed with the Croatoa content.

(( Just a tip for those trying the 30 Fir-Bolg mission... Level 48 caltrops are very helpful... Trip mines... Not so much...))

As for other Issue 5 stuff...

Archery - Not very impressed. It just doesnt feel very "super"

Sonics - Annoying. Started a Sonics blaster, played about 14 levels and decide that I couldnt possibly stand to listen to all that crap for 50 levels. Couldnt stand looking at the Sonic buff set.

Trick Arrows - This set is more interesting. Verdict still out.

Firefighting in Steel Canyon - interesting diversion, nothing more.

New Mission types - I them. I love the missions that have rescued heroes fighting side by side. I like the wave attacks. (Except the 30 Fir-bolg mission, what kind of nuts are you?)

Forced Teaming - THIS SUCKS! I hate that in Striga, I am pretty much required to find help to get past the Maestro AV. I cant imagine a way to successfully beat the 30 Fir-bolg mission in Croatoa without a team! This crap wouldnt bother me if I had the option to skip these missions or even willingly fail them to move on.

Well, I've babbled enough.

In short, there are some things I like about Issue 5... Some things I really really hate. But honestly, I really only have one reaction to Issue 5 so far...

meh....

[ QUOTE ]
Just to get this out of the way, I am not trolling. I have 2 simple questions, thats it. I have searched the forums and have not found answers to my questions specifically. That is why I am here asking now. I love CoH and have no issues with it. I will not bump this post if it's ignored.

1. I noticed CoV is said to be a stand alone game, yet if CoH users want the option to build a base, they need to purchase CoV first.

Question: Is it not considered an expansion when a game affects another directly in the way CoV will be affecting CoH in this base building matter?

2. Consider that some CoH users do not want to be villains. Consider how many issue releases did not include a base building feature in CoH for loyal CoH users.

Question: Why make this unique base building feature (which seems the be the only thing new to CoH users besides being a villian and the content that follows), available to CoH users only thru buying CoV and maybe paying an extra monthly fee?

This is not complaints, just ?'s. I am a loyal customer. I love CoH. It's a great game and the people I have encountered have been wonderful. I needed some clarity on this issue because I am confused. SH = no base, villain = base. I hope an honest answer is posted by Statesman. Thanks for your time

[/ QUOTE ]
This is from sombody who hasn't seen much about bases except they are with holding them from us until COV is out. I haven't seen anything to suggest that you MUST HAVE COV to make them work because that would do two things, A) alienate those who couldn't/wouldn't buy COV. B) not allow the players in A to actually play because from what I can tell Bases will be interspersed in the city, not in an area of their own.

I5 was great for squishies, OK for content ... horrible for tankers, though, and proof positive that we're moving away from "Build as you like" to "Build as we say." IMO

that sums it up...brilliant!!

So far Issue 5 seems to be Status Quo, however.... The current state of Phase Shift completely negates my original vision of a dark shadowy figure springing from the Nether-realms to deliver justice to unsuspecting evildoers. It's not even useful as a means to escape death at the last minute. Phase Shift has gone from being my favorite, and one of the most useful in game abilities, to being completely worthless under any circumstance. I should take this opportunity to thank those responsible for all the debt I've gotten trying to activate PS before getting defeated during PvE. While I've heard that assurances were given that PvP would not effect PvE game play, the Phase nerf is an obvious indicator that it will.

I'm realistic enough to know that my complaint won't amount to action, that one hundred complaints wouldn't amount to action. The development team will give us what they want, when they want and our only recourse is to stop playing or accept what we're handed and wait for the next helping. If any of you working at CoH care, I hate the PS nerf, not because I abuse it in the arena (because I've never even entered the arena), but because it completely negates the character I set out to play when creating the Dark Horse. Roll back the Phase Shift nerf, apply an arena limitation to it if necessary, and let me play the character I developed.

If you're looking for things to fix how about a full on Teleport Self overhaul. As far as travel powers go I don't think you could have come up with anything more clumsy and ineffectual. How about more than 2 costume additions a year. Trenchcoats maybe?

Thanks for the response Calax. I sure hope your right.

[ QUOTE ]
Have you considered what it is to be a post-40 Invul tank who wants to solo?

Have you read the plethora of posts in the Tanker forum agreeing that Invul needed to be toned down, but not [censored]?

Are you aware that Fire and Stone both have better non Smash/Lethal resistances than Invul?

Invulnerablility was designed originally as a Resistance based powerset. Now, once you get Invincibility, it becomes a Defense based powerset. This isn't a change of tactics. This is a destruction of concept. You cannot build a playable Invulnerability Tanker whose concept is to stand there and take damage for a team. Not after lvl 20. What's more, is that in order to maximize the defense bonus for Invincibility, you have to herd. Have to herd. Believe it or not, there are Tankers who don't like to herd!

I don't like to herd. I don't like PvP. I loved playing Tankers. I5 screwed me. I got the impression that you don't play Tanks. If you don't, then don't bother to tell me what you think my favorite AT needs. I get enough of that from Jack Emmert.

[/ QUOTE ]

AMEN! Except replace post-40 with 38 (and little hope of keeping a group without feeling like a leech, since I contribute less damage than the controller, hold less aggro than the blaster, can't heal, buff, or debuff like a defender, and can't kill as fast as a scrapper.)

[ QUOTE ]


Just wanted to point out that you can go to Croatoa at level 25 and talk to the mayor NPC and start the Croatoa missions. Just as you can start the Hollows content at level 5 just by visiting Lt Wincott, even if your first level 5 contact hasnt sent you to Wincott yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotta be kidding. Why the sudden break in how we get missions? That's moronic. Sigh...

[ QUOTE ]
[...] you know in the legan system saying one thing in print that a complete and total lie is called libal. And while it is often used in the terms of defimation of character the essense emains the same.

[/ QUOTE ]
For the act to qualify under the tort of Libel, the falsehood must be about a person, and must cause that person some real and measurable damage(s) (social, financial, or similar). That is not the case here, ergo, such a statement cannot qualify as libel. Period, end of story.

[ QUOTE ]
1. I noticed CoV is said to be a stand alone game, yet if CoH users want the option to build a base, they need to purchase CoV first.

Question: Is it not considered an expansion when a game affects another directly in the way CoV will be affecting CoH in this base building matter?

[/ QUOTE ]
Just because the two games interact with each other, does not make CoV an add-on or expansion pack. IT will be entirely possible to buy only CoV, never have once in yoru life had a CoH account, and get all the CoV content your heart could desire.

[ QUOTE ]
2. Consider that some CoH users do not want to be villains. Consider how many issue releases did not include a base building feature in CoH for loyal CoH users.

Question: Why make this unique base building feature (which seems the be the only thing new to CoH users besides being a villian and the content that follows), available to CoH users only thru buying CoV and maybe paying an extra monthly fee?

[/ QUOTE ]
To encourage sales of CoV, I'd presume. Besides, from what I've seen, it may be NO extra fee to have a COH-and-COV account pairing; the price guesstmate I've seen quoted here is $0-$5 (USD) extra, per month.

i've decided that i5 is busted in ways i find it hard to describe
clearly. my DA scrapper can solo at unyielding _faster_ than she should in
i4; for soloing i'm going to crank it up to invincible. i had no
trouble jumping 2 +1 death mage bosses and i had a bit (had to use
insps and my self-heal) vs two +1 ring mistresses _plus_ a ranged ambush
of like 6 carnie minions that happened at the same time. with a 'fender
in missions at unyielding we literally never have to slow down and neither of
us is in any danger.

but 10 minutes with my poor ice tank is enough to show that it's as
bad as they say; she could never tank for a group of 8, not when five
underlings can kill you before you can put them down. and it looks like it's
not a lot better for some of the others: i ran a stoner's mission
(on invincible) the other night with a team of 6 and he couldn't hold aggro
and still died twice. i went down once (when i tried to hold aggro from the
AV and her group alone so the others could run; no surprises there,
except the tank went down first.)

i think i've read every post by a red name on the I5 issues but i still have
absolutely no idea what you were trying to do. you kept saying "balance"
(as if that, by itself, explains anything) but it is painfully obvious that
wasn't it. if it was, Big Rose wouldn't find it easier to handle tougher
opponents at the same time that Little Rose is a candidate for deletion.

[ QUOTE ]
Just because the two games interact with each other, does not make CoV an add-on or expansion pack. IT will be entirely possible to buy only CoV, never have once in yoru life had a CoH account, and get all the CoV content your heart could desire.


[/ QUOTE ]

Presumably, since they are two seperate games, one should be able to have their Villian and Hero logged in at the same time (a potential boon to two player households).

Thanks States, great work on I5!

I was skeptical of the changes when they first went to test but I've been completely suprised by how well they added the fun back into the game. Good work. The new missions and new zone are fantastic.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just because the two games interact with each other, does not make CoV an add-on or expansion pack. IT will be entirely possible to buy only CoV, never have once in yoru life had a CoH account, and get all the CoV content your heart could desire.


[/ QUOTE ]

Presumably, since they are two seperate games, one should be able to have their Villian and Hero logged in at the same time (a potential boon to two player households).

[/ QUOTE ]

That depends on how you register them.

If you add CoV to your existing CoH account you'll get the discount but you can't log both of them at the same time.

However if you make a second account for just CoV you can log both but you'll pay 15$ a month for each.

At least that is my understanding.

PS
And I'm pretty sure it's been mentioned that you NEED CoV for bases in CoH. Not sure though.

[ QUOTE ]
At least that is my understanding.

[/ QUOTE ]
Mine as well. The lack of added server load and maintenance would be one way to explain the discounted monthly charge.

I'm expecting a COH/V combination account to cost $20 per month, myself. COV will need some income on a monthly basis, to pay for it's share of attention from the devs, WRT future updates and such.

removed

[ QUOTE ]
Have you considered what it is to be a post-40 Invul tank who wants to solo?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm imagining it's almost like anyone else post-40 that wants to solo, now.

[ QUOTE ]
Have you read the plethora of posts in the Tanker forum agreeing that Invul needed to be toned down, but not [censored]?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep.

[ QUOTE ]
Are you aware that Fire and Stone both have better non Smash/Lethal resistances than Invul?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you aware that there's more to being a tank than just raw resists? Fire also has damage but lacks defense. Stone can get those higher resists but at the cost of speed, recharge, and defense. Stone can basically choose S/L defense OR resist but can't have both at the same time

[ QUOTE ]
Invulnerablility was designed originally as a Resistance based powerset. Now, once you get Invincibility, it becomes a Defense based powerset. This isn't a change of tactics. This is a destruction of concept. You cannot build a playable Invulnerability Tanker whose concept is to stand there and take damage for a team. Not after lvl 20. What's more, is that in order to maximize the defense bonus for Invincibility, you have to herd. Have to herd. Believe it or not, there are Tankers who don't like to herd!

[/ QUOTE ]

So... A set with mainly resistance powers, but with some decent defense powers is a resistance powerset. Well, hate to tell you this but maybe you're not correct about that anymore. Maybe it's original design still stands today but people didn't see the benefit of the defense side of things until both were scaled back. Maybe it's supposed to be a resist/defense set, was designed that way, and people just focused heavily on the resist side.

Destruction of concept is unfortunate. However, the whole 'stand and take damage' seems pretty lazy, really. Now tanks have to be more active. You know, like everyone else. The tank that just stood around soaking up damage and taunt-botting always struck me as something of a useful xp sponge, but not much more than that though.

From a design perspective keeping an overpowered poewrset as it is in order to preserve the concept characters is absurd. Unfortunately for those concept builds, though.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like to herd. I don't like PvP. I loved playing Tankers. I5 screwed me. I got the impression that you don't play Tanks. If you don't, then don't bother to tell me what you think my favorite AT needs. I get enough of that from Jack Emmert.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, while herding wasn't specifically stated in my post it was implied. However... the point still stands; an I4 tank could handle the agro for multiple 8-man invince spawns. Multiple being more than one, up to and including every spawn on the map. But generally 2-4 spawns was a cakewalk for almost every tank I grouped with. Just about any non-ice, non-concept build (which are almost always exceptions to the rule as it is) tank could do this and stand a better-than-even chance of coming away relatively unscathed. This is unbalanced no matter which way it is turned or spun. Now the game off of easy mode for most builds. Some builds can still be uber, or a reasonable facsimile thereof. Even those builds, though, have to take a more active role in groups, now.

And PvP... can take it or leave it. It's never been my thing. I, therefore, haven't commented on it because I'm not qualified to comment on it on anythign other than general terms (lots of pvp experience elsewhere but none in CoH).

In I4 every tank I grouped with post-30 had the game set to Invincible. Every tank that had a lower difficulty either didn't know how to increase it or wasn't a good player (would consistantly forget to turn on toggles, would rush things before turning on toggles, etc.). In I5 far fewer are on Invincible. The highest difficulty setting now represents a degree of difficulty for players. Sounds like some semblance of balance has been found, even though it was through painful nerfs.

Oh, and I do play tanks. They were just so boring and easy to play before that they never held my attention long. Then... My highest was an Invince/Stone, set to invince at 20, retired at 34 because it was WAY too easy. Sure, things like Malta and Carnies would have made the 40+ game more challenging, but... meh. Couldn't be bothered to take it that far simply because of how easy it was before. Now... I rolled a couple of tanks, an Ice/Mace out of masochistic curiousity and Stone/Energy on coolness (Granite + Total Focus = one of my favorite visuals in the game).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks States, great work on I5!

I was skeptical of the changes when they first went to test but I've been completely suprised by how well they added the fun back into the game. Good work. The new missions and new zone are fantastic.

[/ QUOTE ]

hey jack needs his laundry done and his dry cleaning picked up hurry im sure you can do that for him too. and you should practice the animal house battle cry and stance BEND OVER AN SCREAM THANK YOU SIR CAN I HAVE ANOTHER

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah! Because, you know, heaven forbid someone have a differing opinion from yours. Heaven forbid that just because you don't like something their opinions would remain valid.

It's amazing mow many people who don't like I5 tend to resort immediately to personal attacks or fanboy/suckup references on people that like I5. Yeah, this goes both ways... (those that like I5 and those that don't) But it seems like more people call out personal attacks against those that support I5.

Ad hominem much?

Tankers seem pointless to me now. Invulnerability has always been a prototypical hero ability, and it's performance is extremely lackluster post-I5. The amount of slotting it takes to bump up to half my previous survivability really does not leave a lot of variety in builds, and barely leaves anything left for offense. And poor Ice Tanks in general. I understand that having a high-level Tank being able to survive almost anything was a cause for concern and really didn't have much risk. However, the end results were too drastic in my opinion for non Smashing/Lethal damage. Additionally, these changes have really hit early-level Tankers very hard.

I've been playing my Scrapper more as a result, and frankly with good Defenders/Controllers backing him, I see no need for Tanks at all - not even for some AV's like Mary Macomber, Nemesis, Anti-Matter. Only the really tough AVs seem to require Tanks on team from what I've seen and played. What does that tell me about the nature of tanks? This. They have no real place. They don't have a required function. They are replaceable in teams. I've stopped playing my tank, because it seems like his inclusion in teams is more of a charity than it is a requirement or benefit to them.

Since I5 hit, I've barely seen many Tanks in-game, and I've played with even less. And the 45+ game is really no much worse or harder for it. Now more than ever, I wonder why Tankers and Scrappers were ever differentiated. They should have been the same class, only differentiated by whether you wanted to slot Offensively, Defensively, or balanced between the two. But at this point, Pandora's Box has been opened - I have no idea how you can rectify this. I've already deleted all my low-level tankers, and each day it gets harder for me to NOT delete my lvl 50 Inv/SS and free up a potentially useful slot on Champion.

*EDIT: It's been stated that each AT bring something useful to teams, but no one AT should be generally required. To me, that is no longer the case. Tanks need a Defender backing them OR a Controller managing additional aggro. Without either of these, a tank is not worth the team slot UNLESS it's for specific AVs.

The defense debuff protection is a welcome change, but I would have preferred it to have been worked on and developed a bit BEFORE the global -Def was introduced. How long do Ice Tankers, Super Reflex Scrappers, and Force Fielders have to play seemingly crippled or under-performing characters until they see results?

I've run my SR Scrapper in a lot of teams with other Scrappers. Even after including Tough/Weave into my build with the SR powers, I'm still taking more damage, burning through more endurance, and doing less damage than other Scrapper types of my level (currently 23, fully slotted with SOs). To Emphasize: even after adding Pool powers and slotting Defense heavily over Offense, SR is still out-survived by other Scrappers. That has nothing to do with being debuffed with -Def; the set is inherently weaker than the other secondaries.

I've said it before in regards to SR: Combine the Ranged/AoE passives into one power slot, and the Ranged/AoE toggles into another. use the two free power slots to add utility powers to SR; Examples: 1) a passive power to increase Health/Endurance regeneration (does both at 1/2 the capacity of the Fitness pool, and you can slot for either health or endurance recovery); 2) a click similar to Adrenalin boost; 3) a click similar to either Dull Pain or a click version of Mind over Body. Other forms of damage mitigation are needed. What's the point of only having +Def if it's at a poor level? And as far as concern about changing the Power Set: I have met few if any SR's who skip any powers other than Quickness and/or Elude - all the other powers are usually taken almost without fail.

*EDIT: Having more fun with Scrappers now than I've had with my Tank since I4 when the nerfs really started. And yes, he was 50 with resists capped long before that, so it's not a matter of risky survival being factored in - it the character's effectiveness.

[ QUOTE ]

In I4 every tank I grouped with post-30 had the game set to Invincible. Every tank that had a lower difficulty either didn't know how to increase it or wasn't a good player (would consistantly forget to turn on toggles, would rush things before turning on toggles, etc.). In I5 far fewer are on Invincible. The highest difficulty setting now represents a degree of difficulty for players. Sounds like some semblance of balance has been found, even though it was through painful nerfs.


[/ QUOTE ]

my icer (low 30s) wasn't because Invincible + Ice Primary = Missions That
Take About A Week If You Do Them Solo. and a "semblance of balance" only
works if you acknowledge that it means some characters now bring nothing
of value to any team while others have an easier time at all difficulty levels.
which isn't my understanding of basic english, but maybe i missed a meeting.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

In I4 every tank I grouped with post-30 had the game set to Invincible. Every tank that had a lower difficulty either didn't know how to increase it or wasn't a good player (would consistantly forget to turn on toggles, would rush things before turning on toggles, etc.). In I5 far fewer are on Invincible. The highest difficulty setting now represents a degree of difficulty for players. Sounds like some semblance of balance has been found, even though it was through painful nerfs.


[/ QUOTE ]

my icer (low 30s) wasn't because Invincible + Ice Primary = Missions That
Take About A Week If You Do Them Solo. and a "semblance of balance" only
works if you acknowledge that it means some characters now bring nothing
of value to any team while others have an easier time at all difficulty levels.
which isn't my understanding of basic english, but maybe i missed a meeting.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad. Forgot to re-add in the bit about excluding Ice when talking about tanker balance (it was in an earlier post of mine). In fairness I should also add in that I haven't seen a post-40 ice tank that wasn't PL'd to post-40. Ever.

Semblance of balance among the AT's in general, barring the notable anomolies of SR and Ice.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks States, great work on I5!

I was skeptical of the changes when they first went to test but I've been completely suprised by how well they added the fun back into the game. Good work. The new missions and new zone are fantastic.

[/ QUOTE ]

hey jack needs his laundry done and his dry cleaning picked up hurry im sure you can do that for him too. and you should practice the animal house battle cry and stance BEND OVER AN SCREAM THANK YOU SIR CAN I HAVE ANOTHER

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah! Because, you know, heaven forbid someone have a differing opinion from yours. Heaven forbid that just because you don't like something their opinions would remain valid.

It's amazing mow many people who don't like I5 tend to resort immediately to personal attacks or fanboy/suckup references on people that like I5. Yeah, this goes both ways... (those that like I5 and those that don't) But it seems like more people call out personal attacks against those that support I5.

Ad hominem much?

[/ QUOTE ]


Please Do Not Feed The Troll - Thank You.

Back on topic - while I think I5 was not a sterling release, I had no problems adjusting to the global defense changes. Both of my tanks can still tank, my defenders still defend, and my blasters and scrapper destroy faster than ever. I created a grav controller on another server and am having a blast with that. The new powersets are also fun.

Problems: Sound loop crash, very bad. I personally had ZERO crashes from Issue 4. Issue 5 causes me to crash at least once a night.

All in all, I'll give Issue 5 a 4 out of 5 stars.

[ QUOTE ]

Semblance of balance among the AT's in general, barring the notable anomolies of SR and Ice.

[/ QUOTE ]

i haven't looked recently, but i think the bubblers were underwhelmed, many
defenders (the ones with controller secondaries) were a little grumpy, DDDs
seemed a bit peeved, many invuln tanks weren't ecstatic about becoming
mandatory-herding-defense-tanks, and so on.

you'll forgive me if i think "a semblance of balance except for those folks left
out in the cold" doesn't really cut it. global changes of this magnitude
should not leave ANYONE out. i don't think it's acceptible to say "things
are pretty good except for you folks over in the corner, but not to worry,
we'll think about you RSN." uh-uh. if there are ANY folks "over there
in the corner" then these changes are premature and shouldn't have been
rolled out.

i've dinged 50 with my much-easier-to-play-since-i5 scrapper. i'll finish
her arcs and stuff, but many of my "second tier" characters are "over there
in the corner." yay me.

Sorry but I am not calling Issue 5 a sterling release. From what I can tell out of my super group of 75 or so people there are only 4-10 people who play anymore.

Is COH good? Yes.
Are the Developers doing what seems right? Yes.
Is putting suppression on invisibility from casting smoke grenade balance? I guess but its just serves to make the game slower and more of a grind.
Does my Ice controller seem like a new character? Yea, I much rather play my Ice/Devices blaster. He does more damage, has more pets and is WAY more fun to play. Why hold what I can 2 shot anyway?

Oh well, I still play I still have fun, just not with the same characters anymore. Oh and I did roll a defender before issue 5 came out. Thank goodness.

I really hope this works out, but COH has changed the one thing that really made COH the game to play and that is to drive off 90% of my friends, and to be serious that's just not cool.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Semblance of balance among the AT's in general, barring the notable anomolies of SR and Ice.

[/ QUOTE ]

i haven't looked recently, but i think the bubblers were underwhelmed, many
defenders (the ones with controller secondaries) were a little grumpy, DDDs
seemed a bit peeved, many invuln tanks weren't ecstatic about becoming
mandatory-herding-defense-tanks, and so on.

[/ QUOTE ]

*looks at my sig* Yup. Bubblers were hit. Somehow I'm still fine with it, though. I'm also not underperforming with my big three.

Many bubblers were underwhelmed. Mainly because the big 3 got hit and the rest of their powers are situational. The big three, though, *were* too powerful, IMO. Sure, there were situations which negate the bubles or reduced their effectiveness, but the majority of situations left me feeling like the group was on easy mode.

As for the other ones... when seen as a whole and in how things inter-relate to everything else then the semblance of balance remains. I've never said complete balance. Just semblance of balance.

sem·blance n.

1. An outward or token appearance: “Foolish men mistake transitory semblance for eternal fact” (Thomas Carlyle).
2. A representation; a copy.
3. The barest trace; a modicum: not a semblance of truth to the story.



[ QUOTE ]
you'll forgive me if i think "a semblance of balance except for those folks left
out in the cold" doesn't really cut it. global changes of this magnitude
should not leave ANYONE out. i don't think it's acceptible to say "things
are pretty good except for you folks over in the corner, but not to worry,
we'll think about you RSN." uh-uh. if there are ANY folks "over there
in the corner" then these changes are premature and shouldn't have been
rolled out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Note above definition of semblance. Additionally, I agree that the semblance doesn't cut it. We should be seeing things continually rebalanced both up and down, imo. Balance is a continual process, like someone riding a unicycle on a teeter-totter, rather than an absolute value.

Things have the appearance of balance, but really there's no appearance or even a barest trace of balance for SR and Ice.

What we do have is an outward or token appearance of balance instead of gross imbalance that there was before. No, it's not all good. Never will be, though. No, not everyone is satisfied. This would never happen. Yes, it's a semblance. No, it's not the finished product.

Agreed on the whole "don't roll out the changes while some people are left in the corner" parts. Not the best of form. But this is the problem with blanket changes. Someone *always* gets hit whenever there's a blanket change, simply because they are the exception.

Here goes, a few free minutes at work and I find myself tossing my Lemming rear over the cliff, submitting my two cents along with everyone else.

Actually, thing is, I read an earlier post in this thread that claimed 90% dissastisfaction with CoH post I5 (I4 even) by those on the boards..... I thought I would let the cat out of the bag to say that it is a retail and marketing "fact" that those with complaints have an extremely higher likelyhood of voicing that complaint while those with compliments will generally stay quiet. So, its no "news" that there is a higher percentage of dissatisfied comments then compliments in the forums.

The reason States would say that I5 or CoH is being recieved well is because they are probably polling a small percentage of people and (with a very high degree of accuracy) understanding the true thoughts of the paying public (us)! And that is, even with everyone having one or two areas of contention, most or rather, the majority of us are happy with the game....

My personal thoughts (post I5) are completely proven by an AV mission I was part of last night. Seriously the best time I have had with this game to date! (over 1000 hours of play and nothing comes close)

Yes, it was just one mission and yes there were great team mates but, fact is, a group of 8 49+ level heroes went into a mission that featured two AV's. EVERYONE died more then once although not at once and everyone NEEDED each other to keep pressing through. The debt was always worked of in a matter of minutes (in mission)! Not to mention, that the overall xp gain from the mission rivaled that of most ANY farming scenario that I have been in (pre-I5). Imagine the nerve!, a tank (or single entity) NOT being able to stand in and take the beating of an AV and a number of bosses and scattered minions! The tanks actually needed the rest of the team to help with the bosses and minions! Whew, who knew!? I am sure we all could have done better and avoided a few confusion deaths but the point is, it was fun and dare I say, a good example that the changes are not complete [$%@#!] as some would suggest.

Note: the team was 2 tanks, 2 blasters, 1 scrapper, 1 controller, 2 defenders (two people were SK'd) and we actually played very well. it was just hard as heck!

Well, complain away, but I am happy with it!