I am feeling a little under the weather today and not up to actually running much of anything. Aside from that, I have a backlog of things that I ran prior to starting this thread, so I will go back to one of them. So instead of one-a-day today, you get one-awhile-back. At any rate, like I said in another thread, 'The Consequences of War, Part I' was the first MA arc that I ran when I got started playing CoH again.
I ran through it again a couple of days ago, so my thoughts on it are still relatively fresh, although nothing ever really recaptures the impressions of your first time through some.
My thoughts:
- This arc is one of the few arcs that should be outright HARD. I think a lot of writers tend to get a little caught up in their stories and think that because in their own minds, the opposition group are bad to the bone, they have to prove that to the players of their arcs. And that's all well and fine, but what it translates into is a sea of arcs that tend to be boggy and slow because even if you can beat the opposition, you beat them at a much slower pace than normal. This, in my opinion, can detract from the experience.
I thought the Turg arc was pretty guilty of this, but these thoughts are not devoted to the Turg arc, so I digress.
At any rate, this arc concerns itself with a period of time during which humanity was legitimately losing a war and losing quite badly. In fact, the only reason we won, if I remember the canon correctly, is the sacrifice of Hero-1 and the vast majority of the remaining heroes of the time. On that level, this particular arc has a built in justification for being HARD.
And by and large, it succeeds at this... usually by virtue of swarms of Rikti ambushing you in the midst of fights and positioning themselves very well, (especially given the usual randomness of AI positioning), to hit you with multiple stationary mobs at once.
On that level, I could feel as though I was the one of the few remaining resistance fighters on the losing side of a massive war, even though the reality was that I wasn't defeating that many more enemies than I normally do inside of a mission.
- The story is largely well written, though my ego prevents me from considering the character I brought into the arc to be a third or fourth stringer, which is generally what the arc would have you believe. There is an air of desperation inherent to the dialogue that is appropriate. It is not extraordinary, but it is appropriate.
- I do not like one of the maps that the author used. Without going into great detail regarding all the ways it annoyed me, it's a 'blind-you' map.
- I have no real problem with stories that set themselves up for sequels so long as they clearly spell out what they are and this one does. However, when writing a series, it is usually best to ensure that each story can survive on its own. I think this story leans a bit on what is going to happen without resolving many of the immediate issues within the arc itself.
- Rikti are generally fun. They are also usually right in the wheelhouse of the archetypes I usually play. I did this one with a SS/INV brute at 2/+2/Boss/No AV and had no real problems. The missions flowed smoothly. There were no technical glitches and I never got hung up anywhere. Most of the boss characters are tough, but not unduly so as long as you utilize well-known EB killing techniques for solo characters. The assistance offered by my allies was generally nice, but not often truly necessary. (I only mention this because there are many arcs that, for lack of the ally being there, the scenario would be mostly impossible.)
Overall, it is a middling strong arc that could be stronger with a bit more resolution to what's going on prior to moving into the second arc.
Thanks very much for the review, Sister Twelve. I'm always thrilled to get input.
Given the constraints of the MA system, I just didn't think I could give this story justice in one arc of five missions. If the planned doubling of space that's supposed to come with Going Rogue also doubles the number of missions an arc can have (which I understand it *won't*), then I feel confident I could tell this story quite well in nine missions. It expands a mission in order to make both arcs stand basically on their own. That said, once you play the second arc (if you choose to do so), you'll see why the relatively minor plot threads that aren't wrapped up are left to the second arc. That assumes you're referring to the translator and the jammer issues. If not, I'd be happy to discuss other issues further.
As for *the map*, I've had many people say it was very effective--which was why I used it. The reason I used that map is the same as my reasoning for having the number of ambushes and patrols I have in the arc--realism. It doesn't always make for an easy run, but it does make for a believable one. Sometimes you just have to make an editorial call and stick with it. I have changed maps before, in both arcs. That one, however, gets to stay. 
In any case, thanks again--very much!
The SOLUS Foundation - a Liberty and Pinnacle SG
"The Consequences of War" - Arcs # 227331 and 241496
So I thought that I would go ahead and finish 'The Consequences of War' arcs while my thoughts of the first part were still fresh in my mind. I feel a bit better today, but I think the change of seasons is doing its usual thing to my sinuses. At any rate, I finished it... and I think anyone who reads these should keep in mind that although I am looking at each arc individually, I think this entire cycle is stronger than the sum of its parts.
The storyline on the whole, I would probably consider to be much stronger than the individual throughlines of parts 1 or 2 when taken alone.
So... my thoughts...
- The scope of this one is scaled down. The plotline is far more linear than the first one, which essentially means that this particular incident should have some level of dramatic importance to the overall war effort. After all, there are literally thousands of stories of loss and struggle that happened during the conflict in 2002... why focus on this particular one?
Well, unfortunately, other than in a personal way because the loss of the characters individual allies and friends, I never really get the impression that the actions of my character much mattered to the outcome of the conflict... even in a tangential type of way. I survived, yes, but ultimately the war was won by Hero-1 and his group's sacrifice and what my group did was relatively insignificant.
Lots of literature... especially comic book literature... has been written in a way to spin old events in an entirely new way. I am not suggesting that you write something that makes the player character 'the real hero of 2002.' But there are ways to make what the character does matter... and that's what's important. Perhaps he takes some action that makes the later action by Hero-1 and his group possible. Perhaps he does something pivotal to the ongoing war that has nothing to do with the final conflict at all. Perhaps the battle commander the character defeats to avenge his friends is a 'Stonewall Jackson' moment... you know, such a good commander that the Rikti never truly recover from his loss.
All of these are just ideas that immediately spring to mind... take them or leave them... but the most important concept is to make the actions of the character matter.
- This arc's flow was much more uneven than the first. This had a lot to do with the fact that one minion in the boss's mob during mission two somehow spawned at the very top of the fallen skyskraper and it took me over 45 minutes of wandering an empty map to finally locate him. This was, of course, not the fault of the author, but I tend to favor the option that only the boss need be defeated to complete the mission to avoid situations like these. Even aside from the glitch, the arc swung wildly between, 'wow, that was much easier than the first time' to 'wow, that elite boss 1-punched me out of nowhere when I had him at 10% health.. through 4 lucks and all of my widow defenses.'
- I think that since you went the route of making the climax to this very personal instead of large in scope, some attention could be devoted to fleshing out the npc allies that you need to care about in order for the end of the arc to be effective. As it stood, I felt like I really knew none of them other than Captain Superior and, as such, the impact of their deaths during the final mission was not as strong as it might have been.
Basically, I would just say to make a choice. Are you writing a large story? Or a small story inside of large trappings? Either has the potential for enormous impact... but this storyline on the whole, (both arcs combined), tries a little too hard to be both. If you chose one or the other, I think you would be telling a more compelling tale.
- Played it on my widow at 2/+2/Boss/No AV. Aside for the aforementioned 1-punch that came apparently from Alabama out of nowhere and dropped me from full to 0, there were no significant difficulty problems. The ambushes during the Rikti missions were hard, but not overwhelming. Dr. Lexis became my favorite ally for no other reason than she gave me fortitude and I didn't have to use a single inspiration during the fight with the Heavy Mech EB. The Vanguard mission seems a bit light in comparison to the rest, but if played back to back, it probably is good to give the player a bit of a breather.
So in conclusion I would say that I consider both arcs taken individually to be good stories... the entire storyline taken as a whole to be a superior story... but one that doesn't quite become a GREAT story simply because at its heart, it doesn't quite know what it wants to be.
Thanks again for the feedback, Sister Twelve. I'm operating on no caffeine through blurred eyes at the moment, so any great comment I might have is still asleep. I can say that it wasn't my intention to create a story that changed canon. Not every hero in the war was Statesman or Hero 1, and not every super group was the Freedom Phalanx or the Midnight Squad.
The powers-that-be at Cryptic and NCSoft have already established who the great heroes of that war were. Neither you nor I can create new ones without breaking canon, any more than I could create another George Patton or Douglas MacArthur if we were writing a realistic tale of World War Two.
My intention was to write a story about "the common hero," as it were. Who were the hundreds of heroes we *haven't* heard about that died in the war? What did they contribute? I see CoW as a vignette that was replayed all across Paragon City, and the world, by other heroes and groups. The particulars may have been different, but the general effort and outcome were the same--they held lines; they saved "the little people;" they protected allies; and they made smaller, unsung, contributions that may really have made a difference in the long run. Such is the way of war. If I were to write them as having batantly changed the face of the war, or in such a manner that Captain Superior or the player character rivaled Statesman and Hero 1 in his/her scope of impact, it would be canon-breaking--and that isn't what I want.
As for your specifics...
I agree that the NPCs could use some more fleshing out. I cut the mumber of NPCs down in order to give the remaining five more face time. Unfortunately, I'm sitting at 99.90% and 99.87% memory respectively. If they *do* double the amount of memory, I plan on giving them some more heft. I also plan on giving the war imagery itself a little more push.
I'll track down that boss problem and *re*set it to "boss only." As with just about every other creator that posts on these boards, I've fixed that once already, however it apparently didn't take.
Thanks again for your review and feedback. It always helps.
The SOLUS Foundation - a Liberty and Pinnacle SG
"The Consequences of War" - Arcs # 227331 and 241496
Quote:
I think you are correct in that you cannot write a story that essentially changes the framework of how the invasion of 2002 ended. That is canon. However there is nothing anti-canonical about crafting a tale that essentially makes that moment possible. Nor is it anti-canonical to craft a tale that is pivotal in scope yet has nothing directly to do in that moment. And I am not necessarily advocating you do either one of these. But it seemed as though this is the way you were leaning at the end of the first arc.|
Thanks again for the feedback, Sister Twelve. I'm operating on no caffeine through blurred eyes at the moment, so any great comment I might have is still asleep. I can say that it wasn't my intention to create a story that changed canon. Not every hero in the war was Statesman or Hero 1, and not every super group was the Freedom Phalanx or the Midnight Squad. The powers-that-be at Cryptic and NCSoft have already established who the great heroes of that war were. Neither you nor I can create new ones without breaking canon, any more than I could create another George Patton or Douglas MacArthur if we were writing a realistic tale of World War Two. |
IE, "This is not the group that you or I would have chosen to be the defenders of the planet, but in the end, they found just enough inside themselves to help turn the tide."
War settings are gigantic settings. No, you aren't going to essentially change the chain of events in WWII. But WWII has probably had more literature written about it and more films made about it than any other conflict in history. Some of the stories and films are large... some are small. And what I am suggesting here is that you make the choice between one or the other.
During the first arc, it seems very much that you are going to go large. At the outset of the second arc, you do a 180 and go small for the rest of the way. Unfortunately, you spent so much time establishing that you are going large during the first arc, that when you establish that the rest of this is going to just be about the fight at this particular hospital and these particular people, you haven't made them deep enough for it to be a truly moving small story.
"Saving Private Ryan" is essentially a small story. What it boils down to in a nutshell is whether or not it was worth it for this group of guys to sacrifice themselves for this one guy. And the reason it works as well as it does is because by the time you reach the point where they are sacrificing themselves one by one, you really care about them. I understand the constraints of MA prevent you from showing us predictable onscreen deaths for any of the SOLUS Collective. But you need to take the time to establish what makes each of them individually special if that final mission is going to be me picking through the rubble and finding out one by one that they are dead.
I think your arcs are very well done and I think the storyline as a whole is also very well done. It just misses greatness though, because it tries at one moment to be one thing and then doesn't follow through on that because it starts trying to be another, but it hasn't put the pieces in place to make the other truly effective.
Maybe you can explain in greater detail what makes you think I'm "going large" in the first arc, versus not doing so in the second. It was never my intent to "go large," as you put it. I've not had any other reviewers or players make that observation. My initial inclination would be to write this off as a misunderstanding on one player's part and leave it be, but you've gone to such effort, and demonstrated such eloquence, that I can't.
Again, my intent was to show one scenario of a potential of hundreds. The Rikti have instructed any number of Commanders to "handle," as it were, any number of target areas. Hro'Dath is "our" Rikti Commander, and the SOLUS Collective is "our" group. Hro'Dath's methodology includes jamming radios and setting up diversions that split the opposition and leave them open to easier defeat once the command comes down from the Rikti higher ups to take the bases.
In my mind, I'm assuming that other sub-commanders are attacking other bases. This one--the SOLUS Collective being helped by your hero--simply ends up being the strongest resistance with the quickest minds in his target area, and thus Hro'Dath gives it some personal attention at the end. The bottom line is--this same scene is being played out across the world. "The Consequences of War" is simply picking an example.
Even at that, I tried to include *some* subtle nods to game changing. The translator and prototype heavy suit, for example. They end up being a bigger things, and are potentially canon-breaking, but since the powers-that-be haven't established exactly *how* the translators were developed, or *if* the heavies used in the second war may have been developed to some small extent some months into the first war, they are both small nods to canon I'm willing to risk letting my NPCs--and your hero--have a part in.
In any case, I'm more than happy to hear more detail. It may point me in a direction where---once the memory's increased--I can provide a touch more clarity.
The SOLUS Foundation - a Liberty and Pinnacle SG
"The Consequences of War" - Arcs # 227331 and 241496
Quote:
I think this single line does more to illustrate the concept I am trying to convey here than anything else. She says it right before the final battle of the moon of Endor that leads to the downfall of the galactic empire. The heroes of this battle, of course, are the rebellion's military leaders, who crafted the battle plan that defeated the opposition, Luke Skywalker, who turned Darth Vader, Darth Vader himself, who killed the emperor, Han Solo and Leia, who brought down the shield generator, which allowed the attack on the death star to succeed, Calrissian aboard the Falcon, who fired the shot that destroyed the Death Star... etc... but at the beginning of it, you have...| "Mon Mothma: Many Bothans died to bring us this information." |
Quote:
| Mon Mothma: Many Bothans died to bring us this information. |
Is the story of the Bothans a legitimate story to tell?
I doubt that you would find anyone who would claim that it isn't. But the more immediate concern to the issue that we're discussing... would telling the story of the Bothans somehow diminish Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, Leia, Lando, Mon Mothma and the others who were the Heroes of Endor?
My contention is that no it wouldn't. In a war setting, there is ample room for there to be multiple heroes at multiple times.
And just as the story of the Bothans making it possible for the events over and on the moon of Endor to happen, could there be yet another tale that no one knows about and no one has ever mentioned that made it possible for the Bothans to die to give the Rebeliion the information needed? Of course there could. And acknowledging the possibility of that does not somehow challenge 'Canon.' All it does is acknowledge that our knowledge of 'Canon' is incomplete.
So how does this apply to the immediate arc under discussion and whether it lends itself to being a large story or a small story?
Well, just as there was a chain of events that led to the success of the Rebellion over the Empire and just like we as audience only have fragments and, in this case a single sentence, to fuel our imaginations about what occurred, the same principle applies to Hero-1 and his group's sacrifice during 2002.
I think when I mention this, you assume that I am saying that the player's hero should be the center of every story. That is not what I am saying. But I am saying that if a player takes the time to run through an arc, there is or should be an implied level of relevance to the actions that he is taking. We both agree that there are countless tales of sacrifice and futility and hopelessness and death that occurred when the Rikti invaded. So the question then becomes... what makes this one different?
Are the players and the SOLUS in this scenario 'Bothans?' Or are they just victims? Because if they are just victims, then the story, by its very nature, becomes just a couple of hours of pointless pain that could be repeated. But if the group are 'Bothans,' then the story gains in strength, even if no one ever knew their names.
As far as specifics go, what led me believe this might be a 'Bothans' story in the first arc is less to do with any specific mission goal and more to the fact that everything the character is doing, no matter how insignificant it might appear to the character at face value, is proactive. They are attempts to accomplish something, even you don't know exactly what that something is. There is also movement from place to place. The character acts and, even if the result isn't hugely successful, as implied in some of the mission return dialogues, the story moves from place to place and there seems to be a plan in place that will coalesce in arc 2.
Arc 2 on the other hand... from the very beginning the character becomes reactive. Whatever plan was in place seems to be gone and we are now focusing on the events of a single day. Suddenly we seem a lot less like 'Bothans' and more and more like 'Victims.'
Hope that makes sense.
Today's arc was 'Escalation' by Shagster.
Even if an arc is well known and has been reviewed many times, which is probably in the case of one with this low of an arc ID# and many plays, I try to avoid reading what other people have had to say about an arc prior to posting my own thoughts. That way I try to keep from being overly influenced by either 'gee, they have a point' or 'huh? what could they possibly be thinking?'
As such, even though Shagster's thread is there, I haven't read it and won't until I finish posting my reaction to the arc here.
So, my thoughts on it:
- The story is relatively simple and linear and is a pretty good 'superhero' concept. The overriding theme would be, for the player anyway, 'beware, because what you do has consequences and you can create your own nemesis.' This theme has seen a good amount of usage over the years in many comic books, mostly in the Batman/Joker/Almost every reference to Arkham Asylum dynamic in recent years and probably most effectively, (in my opinion anyway), in the classic Miller Daredevil run that featured Daredevil/Black Widow/Elektra/Bullseye.
The general assumption in this arc is that a villain is tired of the constant failure, especially at the hands of one particular hero and the obssession gives the villain who would ordinarily be riding the bench the skill and effectiveness to become an actual threat.
Miller's run is particularly effective because we see Bullseye simultaneously unravel before our eyes AND strive to overcome what he has always been... a z-stringer. After all, up to this point in Marvel history, the guy was a joke. He'd been spanked by every hero he'd ever come across and after a few truly spectacular beatings at the hands of the street level, non-powered Daredevil, he gradually lost his mind and decided to destroy everything that Daredevil loved and, in his finest moment from a villain standpoint, managed to kill the much cooler and much tougher Elektra, spurring Daredevil to deliver one of the most brutal beatings any hero has ever personally laid on a single villain.
This story is probably the benchmark story for the writer of Escalation. I am not saying that he needs to aspire to be Miller or to write his story in the same manner that Miller wrote his story or anything like that, but there are things that Miller does that 'Escalation' does not do.
a.) "This is Personal."
Yes, Escalation calls you, the hero, out personally several times as the story progresses, but you are never really given a reason WHY she has fixated on you, rather than, as the cop tells you, any one of the many other heroes who have beaten her in the past and turned her into such a joke. Once the writer delineate's what is different between her defeat in Atlas Park and those defeats of the past, then the story becomes inherently stronger.
b.) "I am not going to kill you. I am going to kill your family in front of you one by one and make you watch. And I'm going to do it slowly. And I'm going to make sure that they know before the end that the reason they're dying is because you weren't good enough to save them."
Miller's treatment of this concept is particularly good, which is why I think his handling of the overall theme is stronger than the Bat-writers. Once Bullseye fixates on Daredevil, everything he does, he does to destroy Daredevil. Escalation's rampage is potentially dangerous and she does things to bring the hero to her, but for being such a smart person, she really never tries anything nasty enough to get underneath the hero's skin. This means that she never moves from 'she is a threat that needs to be stopped' to 'if I wasn't a hero, I would KILL you.'
c.) "I HATE YOU! YOU'RE EVERYWHERE I LOOK! YOU'RE EVERYTHING I DESPISE! BEES! BEES! BEES!"
Like I said, Bullseye becomes more unhinged with each passing issue. Escalation sort of logically comes to the conclusion after every defeat the player lays on her that the reason she's losing is because she's not powerful enough. And actually, this is a pretty sane and logical conclusion. This means that the progression in her danger level comes not from what she is WILLING to do, but from what she is capable of DOING. That means again that she never progresses from 'you're a threat so I must stop you' to 'my god, if I don't stop you, some really, REALLY BAD things are going to happen.'
- Played on my Widow at 2/+2/Boss/No AV. When the last form of her popped unstoppable, I had to leave the fight until it wore off and return to defeat her. Unfortunately, by the time the contact gives the customary 'you should grab a team' speech, if you've already soloed the rest of the arc, you need to be able to solo her, because you can't add anyone to an already existing TF or SF... at least to my knowledge. So having to leave the fight and return broke immersion a little bit, but, hey, I've had to do that against other AV/EB types for whatever reason before. It was not that big a deal.
The customs seemed pretty balanced for the level range and I had no particular problem with any of them. The defense bots hit pretty hard for lieutenants, but the game could use a bit more hard hitting adversaries every now and again.
Overall, I think the arc was fairly well written. I think with some additional tweaking and changing one or two of the 'disposable' plots like the bank robbery and the police station to plots solely directed at the hero, designed to target the hero in a particularly personal and singular way, this particular story could be much stronger... and possibly strive to jump into the 'classic' range.
quick side note: You can invite teammates in the middle of MA arcs, there's just no team search window button. You can still type /search to bring up the team search window.
Ah, cool. I did not know that. I was still operating under my old Oro knowledge. When I ran Oro arcs, I was always pretty much stuck with whatever I started with. Is this a relatively recent change brought about because of that sort of thing?
Quote:
I believe Ouroboros still doesn't allow invites mid-arc. MA has allowed mid-arc invites since the very early days of i14.
|
Originally Posted by Sister_Twelve
Ah, cool. I did not know that. I was still operating under my old Oro knowledge. When I ran Oro arcs, I was always pretty much stuck with whatever I started with. Is this a relatively recent change brought about because of that sort of thing?
|
Eva Destruction AR/Fire/Munitions Blaster
Darkfire Avenger DM/SD/Body Scrapper
Arc ID#161629 Freaks, Geeks, and Men in Black
Arc ID#431270 Until the End of the World
Only applies to MA, to my knowledge.
Quote:
I interpreted the arc as being more lighthearted than grimdark when I played it. Still that was an interesting view to read, as well as the reasons as to why you made the connections. |
Originally Posted by Sister_Twelve
Today's arc was 'Escalation' by Shagster.
|
A Penny For Your Thoughts #348691 <- Dev's Choice'd by Dr. Aeon!
Submit your MA arc for review & my arcs thread
Quote:
It appears we may have to agree to disagree on several different levels.|
Originally Posted by Sister_Twelve
...But I am saying that if a player takes the time to run through an arc, there is or should be an implied level of relevance to the actions that he is taking...?
...Are the players and the SOLUS in this scenario 'Bothans?' Or are they just victims?... ...Arc 2 on the other hand... from the very beginning the character becomes reactive. Whatever plan was in place seems to be gone and we are now focusing on the events of a single day. Suddenly we seem a lot less like 'Bothans' and more and more like 'Victims.'... |
First, I am trying to describe the realities of *real* war, even if it's in a fictional, and sometimes light-hearted, super-hero setting. Star Wars aside, all wars are fraught with successes and failures, offensive strategies and defensive reactions. There are countless examples in every war this planet has seen where one side is taking an offensive in one area when they have to shift focus to protect against a more pressing offensive by the enemy elsewhere.
Not all successes have the grandeur you suggest. Simply taking a hill or holding a town can have immeasurable effect on a war effort, effects that often go unsung, effects that came at the cost of lives most of the world has no clue about. I'm not telling that tale of grandeur. I'm telling the tale of the hundreds of unsung heroes that died defending our world and giving the "sung" heroes... Dr. Science, Statesman, Hero 1, etc. time to come up with a plan to end the war.
My NPC characters, and just as importantly the player character, are both "Bothans" *and* victims. That is the reality of war. What they did was quite relevant, just not as flashy.
In regard to the differences between the arcs, I must also respectfully disagree. In arc one, Lazon is trying to be offensive in the first two missions. The third mission combines an offensive intent with a defensive reality when he first plans on exchanging information with Dr. Brinell and then sends you to save her. The final two missions are solely defensive.
Arc two starts out even more offensively. Unlike the first, where Lazon is doing the offensive equivalent of searching for straws, this arc has Captain Superior taking reigns in a coordinated effort to deal a major blow to the Rikti-- and you succeed. Unfortunately, the Rikti have begun another offensive that he's charged with countering, and he must switch to a defensive posture--with devastating results.
The heroes in CoW, be they the NPCs or the player character, found technology that could be interpreted as contributing to the development of the Rikti Translators, they crushed a critical radio jamming facility, they saved lives, and they held a line that someone else would have had to hold--or that would have been lost--so that Statesman and the others could concentrate on doing their thing. In fact, that is what the majority of the heroes that died in the war did.
Such is the reality of war. It doesn't make the story of the people involved any less important. It just makes for fewer short-term happy endings.
While you were writing your reviews, another prominent poster wrote this on my thread:
"Played the CoW and I must say I liked it. Especially the fact that I, a common hero try to do my utmost in those dark horrible days. No glory, no songs will be written, no parades, no speeches, just me and my sorrow, me and my duty, me and that tiny part of the war I fought in."
I guess it's just a matter of perspective.
The SOLUS Foundation - a Liberty and Pinnacle SG
"The Consequences of War" - Arcs # 227331 and 241496
Tonight's arc was 'Axis and Allies' by Policewoman. I went into playing this with a good deal of optimism because I have enjoyed of her other arcs that I've played. I also recall a Champions scenario written about 20 years ago called 'Wings of the Valkyrie,' which was based loosely on the same premise. My friends and I have played through quite a few variants of the Valkyrie scenario at various points in time during our roleplaying careers.
I think the further we get away from WWII as a society, the less resonance this particular type of scenario will have in our game play, simply because we will have other, more immediate historical events on which to focus.
The basic scenario, however, goes something like this, 'if you were to go back in time and kill Hitler, what would happen?'
In the 'Wings of the Valkyrie' Champions scenario, there was the caveat that, in addition to Hitler, you would also have to kill enough of the Nazi high command to reach a true historical tipping point that would enact real change to the timeline. The scenario mainly concerns itself with the hypothetical changes that would occur if that plan to do this were to succeed. Probably as much or more fun has been had over the years arguing and debating whether the 'Wings' alternate timeline is at all plausible or whether something else would occur entirely.
'Axis and Allies' doesn't really concern itself with any of those questions. It presumes totally that your character killing Hitler will result in a desirable outcome, at least as far as your character is concerned. Following that, it places you at two historical points during the war, which the author indicates were important enough that if they were to fall, the defeats would lead, in succession, to the surrender of France and England, and then Russia. Finally it places you into a completely hypothetical situation which presumably would result in the surrender of the United States.
The topic at hand is very large... probably too large to adequately deal with in the course of only 4 missions. I could see this scenario possibly being expanded into perhaps 3-4 or more separate alternate history arcs, one dealing with each of the military campaigns touched upon in 'Axis and Allies.' As it stands, though, I felt as though I barely touched the tip of the iceberg.
- Despite feeling as though the subject matter was dealt with in cursory fashion, the pacing of the arc was plodding. This had a LOT to do with the fact that in every mission, I spent a good deal of time wandering around an essentially empy map trying to locate an orphan mob to kill so that the mission would end. This even happened in the Center Map because the spawn point for one of Hitler's associated mobs was way up at the top of the catwalk neatly concealed so that I missed him even though I passed by him three times.
On each of the outdoor maps, the was at least one, if not more, mission objective that took a lot longer to find than expected. I do not mind if a scenario is HARD. I do mind if it is dull. Wandering the empty map is a lot more dull than it is hard for the most part.
- The inclusion of obvious superpowers on regular army types was unexpected. The Soviet soldiers, for example, had superstrength. At first I was a bit confused, but it occurred to me that I was playing in the COH variant of WWII, so I wasn't overly offended by it or anything. The combination of cold powers, MM soldiers, and superstrength in the adjacent mobs did manage to do what few things have managed to do lately... absolutely pulverize my Widow. I took a 1-shot from an EB at the end of the COW arc from one of the AV's that was reduced to EB status, but the soviet generals and their adjacent mobs were the first things that really made me feel like I was outmatched by something.
Not complaining about this... I don't think it's necessarily a good thing if I wipe the floor with everything I ever run across. Just saying that I'm one of the few people who think harder enemies aren't that bad a thing and sort of take them in stride, so I know that if they were tough for my Widow, they probably are devastating for characters who don't have the set bonuses that my characters tend to have.
- Played it at 2/+2/Boss/No AV. Other than the aforementioned soviets, I did not have ay significant problems with any of the custom mobs. I think with the preponderence of outdoor maps, you might consider changing the victory condition on the bosses to just the bosses themselves, simply to avoid situations where your player has to get into a long search pattern to locate an orphan mob.
Overall, I think this was a fair arc, certainly a notch below the other superior arcs we've seen from this author. The subject matter is not addressed with a great degree of depth and she reaches some debatable conclusions regarding the outcomes of certain events in WWII. I am not entirely sure if this is the correct venue for telling the type of story that she is trying to tell with this.
Quote:
To a certain extent, this is one of the points I'm touching on. In 'Saving Private Ryan,' there is no indication that the battle for the town where the platoon dies holds any military importance at all. And within the context of that story, that is perfectly acceptable because Ron Howard decided very early that what he was going to do was tell a small story within larger trappings.| Not all successes have the grandeur you suggest. Simply taking a hill or holding a town can have immeasurable effect on a war effort, effects that often go unsung, effects that came at the cost of lives most of the world has no clue about. I'm not telling that tale of grandeur. I'm telling the tale of the hundreds of unsung heroes that died defending our world and giving the "sung" heroes... Dr. Science, Statesman, Hero 1, etc. time to come up with a plan to end the war. |
However, on the one hand you say that you are trying to do this. Yet on the other hand, you say that what the characters are doing in CoW has the potential to have contributed to larger success.
What I am suggesting more than anything else is that you, as an author, must delineate between the two. In all likelihood, we will never know the names of the Bothans who contributed to gathering the intelligence and getting it to the Rebellion. Unless someone were to write a book telling the story of those events, Mon Mothma's single line will probably all we will ever have as audience to go from regarding them. The participants were certainly not sung and if we believe her, by the time we reach that point in Return of the Jedi, all of them are dead... which is very much like what you are describing above.
However, what those unnamed characters get is at least some connection between their untold efforts and the larger war effort. You imply that it exists in our discussion here, but we don't see it inside the arc. And again, this is perfectly fine, IF, and this is a big if, you as an author have decided that the story you are telling is small.
However, if that is the case, then any focus on larger events at all is extraneous and it takes away from the limited amount of time and space that you have to establish the specific themes and events that are important only to your narrative. For example, it has been said that Howard's depiction of the Normandy invasion on D-Day is the finest ever filmed. And from an aesthetic standpoint, those who support that notion are probably correct. I can't think of another that surpasses it.
But from a storytelling standpoint, the D-Day invasion scene is extraneous because it doesn't add anything to the themes of the narrative that will unfold. It doesn't reveal anything salient about the characters. It doesn't establish any of the plot points that will later become pivotal. It is ten minutes of 'pre-exposition' before the exposition of the film actually starts. It is magnificent to see, but the movie would not essentially change if it was not there.
Now, if your story is about characters and you want us to care about characters, then devote your limited 'screen time' to establishing and deepening the characters. If the story is about events, then connect the events to the framework of the larger event surrounding them.
But either way you go, go wholeheartedly that way and I believe your narrative will probably go down as one of the best done yet for this medium.
While I mostly lurk and rarely have the time or inclination to hop in on threads, I wanted to contribute to this one because, with all due respect, I think you're giving absolutely the wrong advice on what to do with the CoW arcs. I was one of those who provided critiques for CoW as it was being written and rewritten, and if I had a nickel for every time I helped playtest it, I'd at least be able to buy a Coke somewhere. I'm speaking up because I really DON'T want the writer to do what you've recommended.
First, there's one big thing to keep in mind which I think affects perception of any arc. I skimmed through your other reviews and noticed that you tend to play with villains. CoW I and II are heroic arcs. That you choose to play heroic arcs with villains tells me that you probably prefer playing villains to heroes. Nothing wrong with that, but I do notice a different mindset in those people who prefer villains to heroes.
Players who prefer to play heroes are satisfied with feeling their characters have been heroic in a story. Players who prefer to play villains want their characters to be the center of the story. While there's nothing wrong with either preference, the fact is, that preference will in turn affect the type of arcs that people like to play.
Being heroic isn't about winning medals. True heroism (and I admit, the term 'hero' has been so abused in latter years that it's become almost meaningless) means taking action not because you're going to get a medal, or because the world is watching, or because the person you're helping is important enough in your eyes to warrant your intervention. Being heroic means acting to help someone regardless of the cost to yourself, regardless of whether you'll ever be recognized for your actions, whether or not the person is important or beautiful or wealthy or powerful. The only true reward you can count on is a sense of satisfaction from a job well done, and you might not live long enough to even enjoy that.
If what you prefer is to have your character be the main focus of the story, an arc like this will not appeal because it's not a 'your character saves the world/destroys the world' premise. Your character isn't going to be motivated to act unless s/he is going to receive adulation, get to rub shoulders with the bigwigs, get the ladies (or gentlemen), get a promotion, etc.
Again, there's nothing wrong with either preference, but it will affect the type of arc one prefers.
CoW isn't for the faint of ego. It really isn't for those who have to be the epicenter of events in a story. It can't be. You're reliving the past, not rewriting it. When you watch films about the Titanic, you know it's going to sink. When you watch the Zapruder film, Kennedy gets shot. And in the base attacks and the aftermath, a whole bunch of heroes died.
You suggest:
Quote:
and | But there are ways to make what the character does matter... and that's what's important. Perhaps he takes some action that makes the later action by Hero-1 and his group possible. Perhaps he does something pivotal to the ongoing war that has nothing to do with the final conflict at all. Perhaps the battle commander the character defeats to avenge his friends is a 'Stonewall Jackson' moment... you know, such a good commander that the Rikti never truly recover from his loss. |
Quote:
| but the most important concept is to make the actions of the character matter. |
Contrary to what you're stating, the most important concept is not to make the actions of the character be central to every arc. If that were the case, every arc would suffer cookie cutter sameness. The most important concept is to create an arc which is entertaining. Not every arc has to be a "Your Character Saves/Destroys the World -- Again!" to manage that goal.
With all respect, these suggestions completely negate the whole purpose of the arc. The arc isn't about letting people rewrite history. The arc is about giving people a porthole on the past -- an interactive tour, if you will, which allows people to vicariously experience with their characters what it might have been like to be in the original Rikti War.
You also state that more character development is needed in the second arc. I do want to know if you read the profiles of the NPCs. If you didn't, and if you didn't pay fairly close attention to the clues, and relied instead on narrative, then I can see where you drew that conclusion. It's a story arc, and if you miss such things as profiles and clues in the midst of the action (and there is a LOT of that), you miss a lot. Regardless, however, I disagree that the characters need more attention. They don't.
Years ago, my class was studying medieval European history and hit the section about the Black Plague. Our class was typically less than impressed. The next day, our teacher came in and asked us to take five minutes and list every single person we knew on a piece of paper. Somewhat mystified, we did so. She then told us to cross off the name of every third person on the list. We did. She then said, "If we were living back then, all the people you just crossed off would be the people you knew who died during the plague."
I still remember the shift it made in my attitude. Suddenly, it wasn't just 'one out of three' people who died; it was my aunt, my best friend, my next door neighbor. It gave me a sense of perspective.
And that is exactly what the NPC characters are designed to do: provide a sense of perspective. It was my opinion that they served their purpose in that regard.
The NPCs and even the group itself are there for one reason: to give the character a familiar framework with which to view the events of the supergroup base attack and its aftermath. The characters who appear are important in that they are people with whom one might easily identify -- a mother, a grandfatherly type, a smartalec late teen with a good heart despite a bad past, a father. As characters, they're meant to be representative of the kinds of heroes one might find in any supergroup. Through the two arcs, you see one group -- which could be AnyGroup, USA -- go from being a normal, fairly strong supergroup to being all but destroyed.
It could have been any group. It could have been your character's supergroup. That's the whole point. Had you and your group been in the fray, you could very well have been the last one standing while all of your cohorts died. It's not necessary that you be best friends with everyone in the group, or know their personal histories, or even like them. The point is: You see regular people who are there to illustrate the numbers lost.
I think if you read more of the CoX canon about the first Rikti War, you can probably figure out why the supergroup base attack and its aftermath were chosen as the subject of the arcs.
By the way, two friendly 'Saving Private Ryan' points, since they're being used as examples...
Quote:
| In 'Saving Private Ryan,' there is no indication that the battle for the town where the platoon dies holds any military importance at all. |
It's interesting that you bring this up, though. The 'bridge' in CoW II is the hospital. You've got a bunch of the superheroes injured in the attack in there. If the Rikti prevent the evacuation, these heroes won't be able to be patched up and return to the fray -- and the heroes were the best defense Earth had. A relatively small number of heroes could hold off or delay an attack (and your character places the coup de grace) and save a far larger number. It's a sacrifice play.
Quote:
| But from a storytelling standpoint, the D-Day invasion scene is extraneous because it doesn't add anything to the themes of the narrative that will unfold. It doesn't reveal anything salient about the characters. It doesn't establish any of the plot points that will later become pivotal. It is ten minutes of 'pre-exposition' before the exposition of the film actually starts. It is magnificent to see, but the movie would not essentially change if it was not there. |
Too, the scene sets up believability for what Miller is then asked to do. I, for one, would not have had any sense of immediacy in the need to get Private Ryan, nor would I have really believed that four sons in a family could be killed in a single day -- and I'm a Navy brat from a military family.
[/digression]
Don't get me wrong. If you didn't like the arc, fine -- as I said, I'm commenting because some of your crits are in direct contrast to feedback which several of us provided on the arc. You express your opinion very well, but my vote is still that I'd really prefer the author not implement the changes as suggested.
Leave the saving of the world to the men? I don't think so! -Elastigirl
The SOLUS Foundation - http://www.solusfoundation.com
A Liberty-based bastion, seven years strong.
Quote:
Thanks for giving Axis and Allies a try!|
Originally Posted by Sister_Twelve
Tonight's arc was 'Axis and Allies' by Policewoman. I went into playing this with a good deal of optimism because I have enjoyed of her other arcs that I've played.
|
Quote:
| 'Axis and Allies' doesn't really concern itself with any of those questions. ... The topic at hand is very large... probably too large to adequately deal with in the course of only 4 missions. I could see this scenario possibly being expanded into perhaps 3-4 or more separate alternate history arcs, one dealing with each of the military campaigns touched upon in 'Axis and Allies.' As it stands, though, I felt as though I barely touched the tip of the iceberg. |
Quote:
| Despite feeling as though the subject matter was dealt with in cursory fashion, the pacing of the arc was plodding. This had a LOT to do with the fact that in every mission, I spent a good deal of time wandering around an essentially empy map trying to locate an orphan mob to kill so that the mission would end. .... I think with the preponderence of outdoor maps, you might consider changing the victory condition on the bosses to just the bosses themselves, simply to avoid situations where your player has to get into a long search pattern to locate an orphan mob. |
Quote:
| The inclusion of obvious superpowers on regular army types was unexpected. ... At first I was a bit confused, but it occurred to me that I was playing in the COH variant of WWII, so I wasn't overly offended by it or anything. The combination of cold powers, MM soldiers, and superstrength in the adjacent mobs did manage to do what few things have managed to do lately... absolutely pulverize my Widow. |
Upon reflection, however, I probably need to more definitely decide whether A&A is a straight war story, or WW2 with superpowers; then make the story a bit more coherent on that point. (I'm leaning a bit towards "war with superpowers" since it IS CoH, and the player presumably has superpowers.)
Quote:
| Overall, I think this was a fair arc, certainly a notch below the other superior arcs we've seen from this author. The subject matter is not addressed with a great degree of depth and she reaches some debatable conclusions regarding the outcomes of certain events in WWII. I am not entirely sure if this is the correct venue for telling the type of story that she is trying to tell with this. |
Thanks a ton for your input! This arc is admittedly one of my earlier efforts, before I knew anything about how to write a decent story arc, and it probably shows. I'm too attached to it to unpublish it, but I haven't done a good job of keeping it updated. I'm thinking it may be worthwhile for me to do some extensive revisions, both to benefit from experience and some of the new AE features that have been introduced in recent issues.
@PW - Police Woman (50 AR/dev blaster on Liberty)
TALOS - PW war journal - alternate contact tree using MA story arcs
=VICE= "Give me Liberty, or give me debt!"
Quote:
My thoughts are entirely what they are: nothing more than my thoughts. The author of any arc is free to incorporate some of them, ignore all of them, discuss them with me, or take them into consideration with all of the other feedback he or she has received. It's completely fine that you seem to feel that I am giving the wrong advice, though I think you've probably misinterpreted the general thrust of what I am saying by a wide margin.| While I mostly lurk and rarely have the time or inclination to hop in on threads, I wanted to contribute to this one because, with all due respect, I think you're giving absolutely the wrong advice on what to do with the CoW arcs. I was one of those who provided critiques for CoW as it was being written and rewritten, and if I had a nickel for every time I helped playtest it, I'd at least be able to buy a Coke somewhere. I'm speaking up because I really DON'T want the writer to do what you've recommended. |
Quote:
|
First, there's one big thing to keep in mind which I think affects perception of any arc. I skimmed through your other reviews and noticed that you tend to play with villains. CoW I and II are heroic arcs. That you choose to play heroic arcs with villains tells me that you probably prefer playing villains to heroes. Nothing wrong with that, but I do notice a different mindset in those people who prefer villains to heroes. Players who prefer to play heroes are satisfied with feeling their characters have been heroic in a story. Players who prefer to play villains want their characters to be the center of the story. While there's nothing wrong with either preference, the fact is, that preference will in turn affect the type of arcs that people like to play. |
"Obviously, he believes this because obviously this is where he is coming from, so he doesn't understand what it is to be x, so his opinion is inherently wrong."
The focuse of my discussion has nothing to do with making me the center of the story. It does have to do with the creation of an arc that, at the end of it, would make any player want to play it again because the narrative is compelling.
And again, my thoughts are about as valuable as anyone else's. Ultimately the arc is his.
We've probably reached the end of productive discussion about this particular story arc. The author knows my thoughts on the arc. He knows that I think it is good, but could be better. He probably also knows that I voted for it for the best multi-part arc. Just because you think something could be improved from a narrative standpoint doesn't mean that you don't like it. If I didn't like it, I wouldn't have replayed it. Policewoman probably knows that I enjoy her arcs even though my last post was not a particularly ringing endorsement of the last arc of hers I played.
But I think we've reached the point where the discussion on this arc will become circular. I've stated my viewpoints. He's stated his viewpoints. I've tried to clarify. He's done the same. Now we're at the point where we pretty much just restate and restate with different language. And that type of discussion isn't productive. I'd rather my thread remain as productive as possible and avoid what has occurred in the past with other arcs like 'Blight.'
I've read that thread and don't want mine to become a repeat of it.
Today's arc was 'Matchstick Women' by Bubbawheat.
Most of what I post usually revolves around the narrative strength of a given arc. Sometimes I tend to forget that MA isn't just a medium for telling a story. In the midst of what is essentially one of the better devices ever developed for an MMO for storytellers, there actually is a game behind it and, as such, there will be authors who primarily view the tool from that angle.
This arc sort of reminded me of that fact, because what the author has done is create a very playable arc with a very well designed custom faction that balances, well I think, enough difficulty that it doesn't become a yawnfest type of walk through and a degree of conceptual clarity that I doubt I conveyed all that well in my own arc to date.
Basically, in a nutshell, you are asked to investigate a cult of burnt women with fire powers. The story reveals enough about them for your character to recognize the danger they represent, although the threat they pose within the scope of the arc itself is neither all that immediate or grave.
You are trying more to save them from themselves than anything else.
I think the success or failure of this specific faction will probably have less to do with what the author has done with them in this particular arc and more to do with whether they become an ongoing type of menace in later arcs that he constructs. There are some authors in any medium whose effectiveness isn't immediately apparent... and then perhaps 2 movies into a series or 3 books into a series, you realize how well developed a certain character has become or how well-defined a specific ongoing theme has been written.
- I played it on my widow at 2/+2/Boss/No AV. The pacing was good. I ran into no technical hitches. There is only one map of any length and he has designed the objectives well enough that they can be clearly spotted from a distance, so you don't get into a nasty search pattern. The faction itself is pretty hard-hitting, as most fire archetypes tend to be, but I did not run into any situations that overwhelmed me. The end boss seems balanced as well.
As I said at the outset, this is an arc that on the first run through PLAYS much better than it reads. It is an extremely fun arc to play with a compelling faction, but as to how compelling, it will largely depend on whether the author chooses to go back them and utilize them further.
Quote:
Nor do I--or, I think, Lionors. |
Originally Posted by Sister_Twelve
I've read that thread and don't want mine to become a repeat of it.
|
Not that there's any real threat of that, since the discussion has always been civil. In any case, I *did* follow one of your suggestions and made the boss in the second mission of the second arc a "boss only" requirement. As for the rest, well, I always keep criticism in mind whenever it's constructive.Thanks again for the review, and for the vote.
The SOLUS Foundation - a Liberty and Pinnacle SG
"The Consequences of War" - Arcs # 227331 and 241496
I logged in intending to run Freaks, Geeks and Men in Black by Eva Destruction and was told that I had ten minutes to pack my stuff and get out of the game.
So.. tbc...
Thanks for the playthrough on Matchstick Women. You make some interesting points and you have a very unique style of critiquing an arc, very different from any previous review I've had. I'm glad you enjoyed it, and in a way, left you wanting more. Though I don't have any current ideas for furthering the Matchstick canon, I may in the future.
So tonight's arc was 'Freaks, Geeks and Men in Black' by Eva Destruction.
There are a number of concepts at work here. Fans of shows like 'The X-Files' will see a bit of The Lone Gunmen. Fans of Thunderbolts will see a bit of the time when Hawkeye led the team. Fans of Kurt Busiek's Astro City will see a bit of his Astro City Irregulars group. Basically, in a nutshell, we see the birth of a supergroup... one comprised of neophytes and misfits and, in a nice nod to the notion that not all factions are carbon copies of each other, a reformed Freakshow.
And you become their 'mentor' figure.
Why they would attach themselves to my communist Rogue Islands guerrilla fighter stretched credulity, but, hey I was the one who brought my widow into this scenario, so that's no big deal. She certainly doesn't mind bashing Malta heads, what with them being nearly the personification of every philosophy she despises.
My thoughts:
- The were a few times when dialogue seemed just a bit stilted. The Paragon Protector's bit in mission 4, for example. My understanding of PPs has always been that even if they aren't, they tend to regard themselves as heroes and actual heroes as anarchistic vigilantes. His line was a bit too "I'm evil" for my tastes. Crushification's dialogue was similarly stilted in a different sort of way. I think you can clean these up and make it a stronger arc.
- There were quite a few self-referential, inside jokes littered throughout. Though that sort of thing is not my speed, you will have an audience that appeciates them. Especially given the overwhelming number of comedy arcs out there. I appreciated this more, though, than an arc that necessarily calls itself a comedy. The best type of humor for me is humor that emerges naturally from within the bounds of the story... not necessarily humor that is a blatant attempt from the beginning to do nothing other than make you laugh.
- Sappers. -mumbles-
- Gunslingers. -mumbles further-
- Played it with my widow at 2/+2/Boss/No AV. I can't remember if there was an EB or an AV reduced to an EB, but there are plenty of named bosses of various factions littered throughout. The factions are pretty much all that they claim to be. If you can handle the listed factions, you can handle the arc with no issues.
Overall, this is one of the best 'straight superhero' arcs I've seen constructed. By that I mean, you aren't confronted with a lot of 'graphic novel' morality or 'Vertigo' type surrealism or deconstruction of the genre or anything like that. It's pretty much straight down the middle. The characters you mentor are all pretty likable and engaging. The plot you foil is not one that is designed to END ALL LIFE ON EARTH or PLACE THE WORLD IN SHACKLES or anything like that, but it is immediate and the consequences, if you failed, would be pretty nasty.
Like I said, if you clean up the dialogue just a smidge... inch a bit toward a little more natural style to what they say... I'd say you definitely have one of the better arcs in MA right now.
I will probably replay this at some point. I don't think my Rogue Isles Communist Guerilla Leader has adequately demonstrated to her young proteges what the appropriate amount of force is to use against the likes of Mako... or Malta... quite yet.
Well, I really don't want to do a reviewer thread, because I really don't want to do 'reviews' per se, but I am playing one MA arc a day when I get home from work right now and for most of the ones I'm playing, I can't find the original threads for them, so I guess I'll create a thread to give my thoughts on them.
Today I ran 'Sabrina's Tale,' mainly because it was, well, selected as arc of the year.
My thoughts:
- The spirit mobs are quite well designed. I think they are a pretty good example of a custom faction 'designed right.' There is a conceptual simultaneity between all of them that is mirrored by their look and the power selection. I had minor issues with the inclusion of Crey mobs during the last mission, but that is an aesthetic gripe on my part that you can either take or leave.
- The use of language is possibly the best I've seen of any arc in the game. There is a lyricism to it that you don't often see utilized by the vast majority of the MA authors. The arc on the whole brings to mind a Vertigo like Sandman rather than a mainstream title like the Avengers or the Justice League. I'd like to see more writers use a variety of styles rather than see MA collapse into hundreds of personal in-jokes, (wow, there are a lot of 'comedy' arcs), or things like that. There is room in the system for anyone to write any kind of genre they wish, drama, thrillers, espionage, urban fantasy, whatever... kudos to you for using one not often used effectively.
- The tone is surreal. That is generally not to my tastes. Movies like What Dreams May Come generally just don't send me... the same was true here. I understand the internal mythos you are trying to create and think you do a good job of creating it, but this is not the type of thing I would usually pay money to read or to see in the theater. (I never bought Sandman either... my Vertigo titles were generally ones like Hellblazer and Preacher.)
- The story is... well... depressing. And it's probably meant to be. Once again, this doesn't mean it's a bad story. But I guess there's just something about me that reflexively recoils against stories that are essentially about futility. There's a part of me that always breaks it down to, "Okay, well if it was all futile, then what was the point of telling it or experiencing it?" We all go through futility in our day to day lives. When I do this, I want to feel as though success was possible.
- Mechanically, the missions were sound. Nothing bogged down. I played it on a Widow at 2/+2/Bosses/No AVs and did not hit any major snags. The CoT boss was a bit annoying but that was only because it took me so long to whittle him down. The Elite Bosses seemed pretty on par with what I would expect and seemed neither overpowered nor over-wimpy.
Overall, this is a strong arc that is extraordinarily well-written. It's just not my cup of tea and I probably, for that reason, won't play it again.