Vanguard Pricing

Vanguard Merits are still level-locked at 35. It's one of my contentions with Issue 16, since they specifically went out of their way to lock them down. And even if they weren't, I'd also find your point a bit absurd anyway, since the raid is biased towards optimized, high-level builds.

Actually, Victorian and Napoleonic era was in the era when it was actually quite common to know how to read. This is industrial era. There is correspondence that we have from all ranks of the military in both the Civil War and Napoleonic Wars of low ranking enlisted soldiers telling their loved ones how incredible it was to be fighting under such a wonderful general and how glorious it is even in the face of such gruesome atrocities, etc, etc.

Interestingly enough, many of the reasons that "stupid fighting" took place over the course of history was because those warrior societies set up specific rules of action so that innocents wouldn't get injured and that it would cause a minimum of insult to others (such as fighting "unfairly" or in a matter that would generate a slaughter of one side or the other's troops).

If you actually study the history of the major warrior societies (pretty much everywhere during the Medieval Age along with a number of the North American plains tribes), you'll find an amazing concordance between them of mutual respect for one's enemies and fair treatment on the battlefield along with a great deal of "stupid fighting" being the dictated method of battlefield action.

Do you even know the reason that large military units were used in pretty much all conditions up until the 20th century? It wasn't because of the bravura of their commanders (all but those that were at the top of the organizational structure actually walked or rode out there with their men onto the battlefield). It was because their guns weren't accurate and took a long time to reload. You couldn't ensure that anything would get hit without either getting right up in their face or firing in large volleys, which necessitates walking out in a large line and firing in those large volleys. Because it took so long to load, you generally had to move in with bayonets.

As to the question of religious indoctrination, you'd be amazed at how little warfare has had to do with religion in the past, especially when you're talking about the large formation warfare you're referring to being used. The primary reasons for war were economic, political, or simply expansionist. Telling your soldiers that it is good to die only applies when you're fighting a war against an obviously superior force that will most likely kill everyone anyway.

You're confusing modern warfare and historical warfare without ever putting into consideration the mentality of the time. War hasn't always been the same as it has been now. It's only the same in the most basic of ways.

Fair enough, if literacy were that common during those wars, I'm sure you could get a representative sample. However, refer to my previous statement regarding false bravado in the face of war--add to that the censorship still present still present in much of war correspondance, and you'll realize that you aren't getting an accurate picture of war even now, much less back then. As for how "wonderful" their generals were, of course they said that. It's typically a pretty poor career move to badmouth your commanding officers on paper...even if they were as poor as many of the generals we saw during the Civil War--mostly Northern generals. That's why Lincoln had to keep fiiring his generals for incompetance, and it's also why the South (with its more capable generals and the advantage of home turf) was able to continue fighting for so long despite vastly inferior numbers, supplies, and a less capable industrial base.

The "stupid fighting" was just that--stupid fighting. As one "wonderful general" was fond of saying--the best way to win a war is to inflict the maximum number of casualties on an enemy so that he's unable to continue to fight. Rules of war still exist to protect the innocent, but they don't require you do things that deliberately hamper your own war effort. Generating the slaughter of one side is the point of war--you aren't being warriorlike if you fail to press the advantage against an enemy that could end the war quickly, especially if the slaughter is confined almost exclusively to the enemy's troops. Sometimes, civilian casualites are considered acceptable if they bring a quick end to a war--how many people would have died if the U.S hadn't dropped nuclear weapons on Japan and had instead attempted a full-scale invasion? At the end of the day, the rules of war are the basic guidlines of what your society implement and still live with itself. That's why the U.S. forces don't attack hospitals or mosques, even though we know the enemy uses them to stage and launch attacks. But if your society can't live with itself if your soldiers don't stand in a straight line and wear bright clothing...you figure it out.

Bogus. The top of the military chain was (and is) too important to lead battles from the front lines, and they knew that even then. That's why kings and queens stopped heading their armies during medieval times.

You're completely missing the point. Fighting in large lines is required, but you don't have to do it:

1. Standing up
2. Wearing bright colors
3. Close enough to charge in with bayonets anyway

That's one of the advantages the American army had towards the end of the American Revolution. We made greater use of snipers, we used terrain to our advantage (something even the ancient Oriental armies knew how to do, but had somehow become "dishonerable" among western armies), we even used forms of camoflauge at times. We couldn't afford to fight the war England's way--if our use of tactics during that time makes us dishonerable, then fine. You can argue that winning the war was inevitable and that a large foreign power can't help to hold a colonial power so far away, but that definitely wasn't the sentiment at the time--even among your letters from troops...

Bogus again--warfare, then as now, was largely religious in nature. Consider the Taliban, ask people who fought in the Crusades, people who gave their lives for the Emperor of Japan, the Vikings, etc. Fighting for "God and Country" has been popular since men picked up a gun. It gets people to fight a lot sooner than just telling them you're doing it for economic reasons or political reasons. As for expansion, even American colonials believed it had a religious element. Ever heard of Manifest Destiny?

The mentality of the time persists--fighting the Taliban is largely like fighting a medieval army in many ways. Their tactics have evolved, but their rationale for war remains the same.

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

Sorry, I tend to get carried away sometimes. I enjoy a good debate, and Umbral makes good arguements. Sorry for contributing to a threadjack.

It's a pity I can't remember who has it in their sig, something like;
"How dare you go back on topic? We're in the middle of MAJOR de-railment here!"

I understand (and don't envy the deployment, either), but, yeah. Heated = Lockhammer.

It ain't quite hammertime just yet

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

Interestingly enough, the war correspondence of low ranking military officials is actually considered to be one of the single most reputable sources of historical information from that time period specifically because there was very little in the way of censorship. Of course, if you assume that war now is what it's always been like as you seem to be doing then sure it makes sense to doubt it. Feel free.

Interestingly enough, it's a well known fact that the Northern soldiers readily insulted their own generals. Either way, I don't really think this is the place for a full blown debate on the merits of the North and South and the reasons why which side did well during which points of the war (and if the Southern generals were such incredible strategic geniuses, why did they decide to play an offensive war in the beginning when it was rather easy to see that, if they didn't win nearly immediately, they would lose handily; they were very tactically intelligent, I'll give them that though).

"Commander" does not include generals and strategic command individuals. Commander is simply any officer on the battlefield relaying orders and, no matter how much you try to argue it, the upper command still went out and fought on occasions. How do you think Stonewall Jackson got his name (it wasn't for standing behind a stone wall while is soldiers fought)?

Besides, medieval kings (I can never recall any medieval queen leading an army) stopped leading because they were incompetent in military matters. Those few that were actually decent enough generals still lead on the battlefield and were known for leading charges onto the field (surrounded by a royal guard, of course).

Have you ever tried loading a flintlock musket sitting or laying down?

What do you know about field communications pre-radio? Nothing? You know how I can tell? Because the bright colors worn on the field were designed specifically to allow disparate military units to know who was on what side. Bright colors were designed specifically to allow you to easily know whether you're engaging in friendly fire or not.

Do you even know the effective range of a period smooth bore musket?

Thank you for demonstrating to us that you've seen the movie "The Patriot". Now, joining us back in the real world, you'll realize that the contributions of the citizen militias, of which were the only organized groups of snipers thanks to their equipment (long rifles rather than smooth bore muskets) rather than any specific method of training. The use of snipers to take out officers was mainly discouraged because it simply ensured the mutual destruction of each side's officers (when you start killing their officers, they start killing yours).

Actually, the use of terrain was used in quite the same way in the Orient as it was used in the Occident (if you're going to use one set of terms, use them globally so as not to present one in a more outmoded manner). Because it significantly inhibited the ability of a general to determine troop success, it was used to hide troop movements. Actual battles (not just skirmishes) rarely, if ever, took place in forests or other non-standard terrains anywhere in the world because forests and other closed spaces are notoriously bad for doing such (at least until modern warfare overcame those natural disadvantages with infinitely better communication and visibility improvements). The use of terrain for strategic positioning however is well documented for an extremely long period of time all over the world.

Actually, what won us the war wasn't any great capability or tactical capability on our own side: it was the fact that Britain was embroiled in what amounted to a more important war closer to home so that they couldn't afford to outright quell the rebellion. Of course, the fact that the French helped us out (to a very significant degree) even at their own peril (seeing as they were fighting a war at home themselves as well) helped out too. Assuming that the minor use of a largely ineffective military tactic helped to turn the tide is simply ludicrous (though incredibly romantic).

The Crusades were no more motivated by religion than by economics and politics. Crusaders went down to Jerusalem to kill Muslims and Jews because it was seen a glorious method by which to prove your own virtue. Just read some of the correspondence and memoirs of crusaders. You'd be amazed at how little it actually took to get them down there. Sure, there was a final religious excuse that gave them a definable reason to head down there, but they were gunning for a fight anyway.

The Shinto-Buddhist beliefs of the Japanese were actually more well founded within the context of intense national pride than in any belief structure (though it's about as hard to separate the religious/nationalistic nature of Imperialist China as it is to separate the same nature of nearly all American war efforts). The Vikings were motivated into war by economics. Their belief structure sprang up around the enslave and plunder based economy they developed (as most belief structures have a strange habit of developing around pre-existing societal predispositions).

Manifest Destiny was a method of excusing the aggressive expansion of colonial and pioneer Americans. The expansion was spurred on before the idea of Manifest Destiny was thought up. The concept simply allowed everyone to assuage their consciences at stealing the land from the indigenous populations and leaving their own long term homes.

Except that, if you ever actually studied Medieval warfare, you'd realize that the rationale is completely different. The primary rationale behind Medieval warfare was expansion of one's personal territory for economic or political means or simply because of an outright family feud. The primary rationale behind the current war with the Taliban is based upon the extremist religious views of a minor sect that gained ground thanks to pitiful economic conditions and the promise of a better life in the hearafter (that and preying on weaker minorities in order to assert control).

I think you're assuming that all Medieval warfare was done under the auspice of the Crusades (which it wasn't, the Crusades were actually a rather minor movement on the whole) and that the Crusades were religiously motivated in the first place (which they weren't, the Pope was a known political entity on par with the various King's of the realm within Medieval society and his motives were no more religious than those of any other major political ruler).

You may want to actually brush up on your military history so that you stop getting so much stuff wrong. Acting as if the information in the Art of War was completely unique to Asian military tactics just because it was written by a man from China is completely contradictory to the truth. Much of it is actually quite obvious, and, interestingly enough, it was translated and taught to Occidental military leaders prior even to the American Revolution. Assuming as if every military incursion in the history of the world is religiously motivated is completely ignoring the fact that not everyone is a religious extremist, much less a member of sect.

The Vanguard set isn't the hardest to get, it's just the most tedious. Seeing as how you can only get the Red Cap daggers from one holiday-based mission, they're rare, but killing 333 Red Caps of any kind is actually pretty straight-forward.

And the Tommy Gun should theoretically be easier to get now that they made the Untouchable badge easier to get...but as far as I know the relationship between different Family bosses and the two different kill badges is still tangled and buggy.

Not that I disagree, mind.

...Badges?

I like this idea. It allows everyone the ability to create any of the costumes they want at character creation, while still allowing people who want to flaunt their leet uberness a form of self-expression. Nice compromise as far as I'm concerned.

It's a bad idea because it diminishes one of the game's key selling points. And I don't know what planet this is on, but the one I'm on doesn't see mothership raids done all the time. I know. I've looked. I don't get invited to them, I don't see them just spontaneously happening when I'm there, I don't see any mention of them in any of the global channels I'm a member of. In all the time since they came out, I've been to two raids, an I've heard about possibly three more. That's all.

And you may call it stupid, but that's like saying everyone can get the Overseer badge because everyone can now get into the Shadow Shard, conveniently neglecting that it takes more than just entry permission.

Which proves nothing, which was my point. What the developers intended is not inherently better for the game. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it isn't. That makes it worthless as an argument for anything other than establishing if something is a bug or not, which wasn't the question here. Just because that's what the developers intended isn't a guarantee it's actually good.

You know, you can't really claim "vocal minority" and then quote absolute anecdote as your counter-evidence. This is misleading bordering on hypocritical. When I say many people, I point to the ones present in this thread and the ones who have spoken up on the subject before, and over the years in threads like this one. How "many" that is may be subject to debate, but your anecdote alone is not sufficient to disprove it. And if we're going to commit to that line of argument, then I can safely say that I've never met anyone with all Vanguard pieces unlocked and wondering what to do with his merits, while I have met many people who feel that the costumes are far too expensive for what they are.

They're not a prestige costume piece unless I lost my ability to read. They're an unlockable costume piece, and last I checked, there was no prestige about these. We went over this five years ago. The idea of "prestige" costume pieces is absurd, because you can't make costume pieces which are unambiguously "better," and as such, all you do is pull costume pieces at random and tag them as "prestige." And it's absurd every time. So, I can use medieval armour without restriction, but Roman armour is prestige. I can use an M16 Assault Rifle, but a Tompson Submachine Gun is prestige. It makes no sense. It never did.

There was never any reason for unlockable costume pieces to exist at all. The only reasons anyone has ever been able to provide have been after-the-fact apologetic about why this mistake needs to remain true. Jack tried to call this a dead horse back in 2004, and as you can plainly see, this will not go away. Ever.

Considering how many times you've insulted me in this post, I'm going to have to ask you to up your standards. If you'd actually bothered to read and comprehend what I posted, you wouldn't have resorted to name-calling and insults.

"They are not worth the effort" is not hard to parse. They (the costume pieces) are not worth the effort (raiding and grinding) because they are nothing special. All locking them does is deny them to the broader audience. There are plenty of rewards to give out for "hard work" that are far easier to qualify and quantify and measure against each other. "One more pants texture" is not among them.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

See, I keep seeing that, but... Why? Sure, it's a unique set, but half of its pieces are otherwise available, between Valkyrie, Enforcer and now Ulterior. I guess the head pieces are kind of unique, though the Science and Cyborg parts sort of go there. Basically, it's "one more set," which is always cool, but not at that overhead.

This is actually what changed my mind on booster packs. Yeah, I was never too hot on spending extra money, and I DO believe that micro transactions are the devil, but here's the thing - if they're not put in as paid packs, they'll be put behind some STUPID condition to unlock them and taken out of character creation. Forget that. $10 is worth the utility of having them available right at the start.

Powers, slots, temps and so on... That's bad. Paying for power is definitely a no-no. But I'd sooner pay for my costumes with money now, than pay for them with money, time, effort and anger over and over again.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Enforcer is ok in parts, but clunky as hell in others. Again, this is all subjective and subject to opinion.
Also, it's nigh impossible to make a Vanguard themed character look anything but a bit clunky from lvl 1. The Vanguard parts are very specific (and in my opinion also some of the best in game atm, looks and crispness wise)

I do like the idea about unlocking badges and icons or something with badges, but putting in all the actual costume pieces from the get go.
Either that OR make them global unlocks. Maybe you don't want a new player having all Nemesis kit, or Rikti weapons, etc. But once a player has fought the mobs once, etc, then allow it to unlock on that account. Giving them more creative room as they make more alts.

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

Once again, have you every considered putting one together yourself? Even at the late hours of the night, I've always found that there is a very high amount of interest in RWZ raiding, though this may simply be due to the fact that I play on FreeDumb or possibly because I know how to ask randoms if they're interested without completely ignoring me. I still see RWZ raids happening all the time for no other reason than someone was bored. I've personally led at least 20 raids and probably taken part in at least 10 more, and I actually bow out rather often when asked. The big problem might just be a server issue (in which I don't think it should be blamed on the devs for designing a zone event around having a decent population).

How much more does it take than entry permission? A team with a level 50 character and a bit of time traipsing around beating up on Overseers in the various zones. Not particularly difficult and, honestly, probably a great deal easier than getting the VG pieces.

prestige: adjective; having or showing success, rank, wealth, etc.

The very fact that the pieces are unlockable makes them a prestige costume piece. They're a completely uninfluential mechanism that simply demonstrates that you have done some task that separates you from other people.

Maybe I'm just weird, but I actually like having stuff that you don't immediately get at level 1, no matter how many times I've earned it on various characters.

The reason for them to exist is simply to have something for people to earn. There are all kinds of things you can earn in this game, capes and auras among them, all of which are prestige content. Capes are (or, at least, weren't until the Magic pack came out) just as much unlocked content as the VG costume pieces and I've met very few people that have a problem with those.

Please show me where in my post I've insulted you or called you a name. The closest I've come is saying that you are "impotently whining", which is true: Impotent, lacking power (specifically to affect change), and whining, to snivel or complain in a peevish self pitying way (because, apparently, it's too hard to get these costume pieces that plenty of other people have had no problem getting).

I've fully read and comprehended what you've written. Don't act as if I'm incapable of understanding what you're talking about simply because I disagree with you, especially when you're apparently the one looking for insults in everything I say even remotely critical of you.

Considering that many people have already determined that they are indeed worth the effort (as evidenced by pretty much everyone I've ever done an RWZ raid with), I'm going to have to call bull-**** on you there. Assuming that locking out arbitrary fluff is somehow a great crime that needs to be addressed (especially since it's only a crime because you and the people you hang out with find it difficult to get them in the easy manner so you force yourselves to go through the difficult method), I'm going to have to ask you to realize that you're complaining about how hard a costume set you don't even like is to get.

Plenty of people have had no problems getting the set. They don't have a problem with the set up as it stands. Why should it be changed when it's been perfectly workable for absolutely everyone else?

Because there's absolutely no harm in making it easier for everyone to get. And because, as previously mentioned time and time again, there are plenty of good reasons why people can't or won't do Ship Raids.

I guess the Devs should revoke the XP curve smoothing they did. After all, I never had a problem getting to level 20 in a timely fashion, and neither did anyone I know. Why change what's perfectly workable?

Pretty naive stances (Very, very few things could be said to have absolutely no negative impact. Such absolutes rarely exist). Something like the leveling changes has had a dramatic and often negative impact on the game as a whole in the sense that nearly everything in this game, from items to enemies is relative to what level you are. People who can't see past their noses (gimme gimme gimme) don't realize the harm such a thing has caused. They don't see the big picture well enough to realize the overlapping consequences of any decision in such a game. They just move from one whine to another, and often from one game to another. As such, these people should rarely be taken seriously.

MMOs are about time. If you don't take the time to get something, it decreases in value (because it is no longer rare enough) and it decreases the time value in gaining it. Both are bad for MMOs, which above all else are time sinks, and where the value of any given item is most notably in how hard it is to acquire (particularly in a game like this where any particular 'item' is only fractionally beneficial, and many of them are nothing more than novelty). You don't even see many people in vanguard costumes, but you'll certainly hear about it when those people think they've missed out on something (even if they won't actually use it, such as badges).

Most of this thread is nothing but whining (in general) and poor assumptions (to prove the whining). Time after time someone has asked why the full set costs what they do in response to a heavy, and yet has anyone asked why such a limited one off pet costs 250 merits by itself? Why? To advance agendas, of course (Which is why it is conveniently listed as the set, rather than specific purchases. Maybe children fall for such tricks. Or politicians, they're essentially children, anyhow). We'll likely (or probably have) see a thread in the future asking why the heavy costs 250 merits due to its limited nature. It'll no doubt be argued with the assumption that you can only use it once, but a single costume piece is unlocked forever.

Considered? Yes. But it's completely out of the question. Why? Every time I've been in the War Zone and done a /whoall, it has revealed myself and, at most, two other people. Every. Single. Time. The only way to organise one would be to go out, study tactics, post it on the forums, schedule it, organise it and so on and so forth. And that is going so far beyond the call of duty it stops being a game and starts looking suspiciously like a job. And my job pays significantly more than a fifth of a virtual costume set.

You answered your own question. It needs a level 50 with time enough on his hands to do this and enough charity in his heart to waste his time on me, getting absolutely nothing but a badge he already has. Have you any idea how long it took me to get the Overseer badge on my newblie level 1 character? Going to the Shard is pointless, because there is never anyone there. At all, ever. Asking random strangers to please take an hour of their time and waste it on me is out of the question. I asked pretty much all the friends I had, and the answers ranged from "I don't have level 50 characters on this server" to "I just don't play the same hours as you" to "OK, I can do that some time next week." From when I first started begging for it to when a kind and generous soul finally decided to help me was something on the neighbourhood of five days. That's... Last Friday to this Tuesday. And it STILL took us close to an hour.

So, yeah, it very much takes more than just entry permission.

You're not weird, you're just not listening. I am not against prestige rewards, or rewards in general. I'm against them being COSTUMES. You don't see me clamouring we should get all powers at level 1. Hell, I've argued AGAINST making Ninja Run available before a genuine travel power unlocks at level 14. Powers, slots, badges, accolades, contacts, titles, name colours, all of these are things I am perfectly fine with being achievements. But not costumes. Not in the slightest.

Catch 22: My latest Scrapper required Rularuu's Bane to look even remotely decent. I couldn't get the sword on my own until I was 41, 42 or up, but without the sword, I could never get to level 2, much less 42. I need the sword, but I can't have it now, and I can't get to it, because I'd need to to be able to get to a level where I can have it. Just doesn't work.

And it's not like I'm asking for it for free. I earned that sword on another Scrapper by means of Overlords. I've done the Dr. Quaterfield, Justin Augustine and Faatim the Kind TFs. I've done Naylor's Rularuu arc over half a dozen times, and I've done Pyther's Shard arc at least twice. I've earned the Rularuu weapons a dozen times over, but no, not on this one! No, I have to earn them every time all over again. That's why I prefer veteran rewards, even though they're unfair, and micro transactions, even though they're not a good thing. Because they only need to be gotten once, then I can use them all the time.

I don't care if Vanguard pieces cost 10 000 merits each. If they were unlocked account-wide, I'd know I'm working for something that builds up and wouldn't have to do it over and over again. But for something that has to be unlocked on every character, they just cost too much.

[quote]The reason for them to exist is simply to have something for people to earn. There are all kinds of things you can earn in this game, capes and auras among them, all of which are prestige content. Capes are (or, at least, weren't until the Magic pack came out) just as much unlocked content as the VG costume pieces and I've met very few people that have a problem with those.[/quote

Then we run in different circles. A lot of the people I know feel having to unlock capes is a bad design decision, and the ones that don't care about it typically don't wear capes. Man, it feels like I got transported back in time with this "prestige" argument. There is nothing that's "prestige" about costumes, because the unlockable stuff is typically worse than the stuff you get. So unless you feel looking tacky is prestigious, I have to disagree on both the validity and the merit of prestige costume items.

Actually, wasn't one of the main arguments FOR city of heroes that "I don't have to look like everyone else because everyone has the one best set of gear?" Last I checked, people enjoyed being able to look good by their design, not "good" by virtue of what the "best" pieces in the game were. That's the big problem with this "prestige" thing. Unless it actually looks better than what we get for free, it's not really prestigious so much as pompous, and what looks good doesn't come down to stats or designation, it comes down to the player's ability to make a decent costume. And, quite frankly, a good costume always, always trumps a full set of any one thing, because full sets are always silly, including Vanguard.

You answered you own question. Insulting my intelligence is the fast-track way to get me to flip you the birdie. I'm generally not a bad person, but I've no qualms about being the bad guy when I feel the other party is treating me like crap. You went out of your way to perform character assassination on me, demonstrating me to be unworthy of making these claims while carefully avoiding addressing the actual claims, themselves, like they were beneath you. It's all "you are this," "you are that," "you should do this" and "you shouldn't do that." That, and statement and restatement of the same facts without an actual argument for them. So my response to that is quite natural: go to hell.

I'm going to remain polite and in the discussion as long as there is something to discuss, but "this is stupid" and "you are impotently whining" do not constitute something to discuss, unless we are discussing my worthiness as a human being. Here's the thing - even if you run me into the ground, you're not going to be right unless you can run everyone who shares my opinion this thread into the ground, too. We may not be many, here at least, but by the same token, I am not alone. So unless you have an argument against the concepts and suggestions made here, shutting people up is not going to produce any results.

You claim to understand what I'm saying, yet you keep missing it by a mile. You keep arguing about the cost of the costume item and its value separately, when they are both part of the same thing - worth. An item that is worth it may have a high value with a high cost, or a low value with a low cost. Examining the item AFTER you acquire it, you are looking only at its value but ignoring its cost, and claiming people say it's valuable. It IS valuable. Not as much as you claim, but it is. You then examine the item's cost separately, and determine it to be low, at least by your standards. And it may be. But the item's cost is STILL too high for its value, when examined together BEFORE you have gotten it.

Also, your observations may not be objective, because from what I hear, you're mostly looking at people who enjoy ship raids anyway. As such, the cost, to them, is significantly lower. As Mattias Nilsson said, "As long as you're going to kill someone anyway, you may as well get paid for it." For me, someone who dislikes raids and other high-population events, it's a significantly higher cost. Are the costume pieces good? Yup. They're not bad by any stretch. Do I want them? Sure, the more pieces available, the better the costume-making experience. But I don't want them enough to go out of my way and organise raids for them, and getting them through regular missions is out of the question.

Let me ask you this - what does the game gain from having these costume pieces be as expensive as they are? The people who have no problems getting them will continue to have no problems, and the people who were locked out of them before will get them now. What does the game stand to gain by people NOT having these pieces, possibly ever at all? What satisfaction do you derive from my NOT having access to the Vanguard pieces? I understand that people would want them, certainly, but I never understood why people want others to NOT have them.

That's all I've been hearing for the past five years: "I can get them, who cares about you." Excuses, apologetic, explanations and spins on why these unlockable costume pieces should be left alone. I have never, not ever, not from a player nor from a developer, heard a decent, convincing argument why these unlockable costumes were needed to be in the game in the first place. It's easy to argue status quo once it becomes that, but I've never been given a good reason why it BECAME like this, and I've never met a proponent for unlockable costume pieces who even cared to have one.

Allow me to ask you a question - how many people have you seen walking around in Vanguard gear? Just random people in the streets or strangers in pick-up groups. Because I've looked, and outside of the one or two people I've seen in full Vanguard attire (which really doesn't look good with the WHOLE set, but that's besides the point), I've not seen anyone so much as use a PIECE of the set. Not even the gloves you get for FREE. And I've looked. I just haven't seen it. Oh, I've seen a few Vanguard weapons, that much I will give you, but pieces of the actual costume? Never seen them as far back as I can remember. And, to me, a costume set almost no-one uses (as far as I've seen) is not a smart use of resources.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

This is such utter nonsense it's no wonder MMOs are stuck in the rut they are if that's the thinking that goes behind them. If you think that all MMOs are is a giant time sink, then I am glad you are wrong on this game. Things here happen quickly and often effortlessly, which is less annoying, less boring and makes for much better replay value. Especially here, in a game built around replayability, rather than taking a bazillion hours to kit a character out completely. WoW pretty much has the market cornered on that, and copying its model is a bad way to go.

I don't know if you've noticed, but people tend to play games to have fun, and despite popular opinion, MMORPGs are still games. City of Heroes, I think, has the right idea in allowing you to have fun RIGHT NOW. Not at the level cap, not in 30 days, not after a specific milestone. Right now. As in, as soon as you step into the tutorial. MMOs have slowly but surely been moving into more entertaining, less grindy gameplay for years. Back in the day, all you did was pick a moor and grind until your brain went blank, but these days? These days you have quests that take you to interesting places, you have complex game and plot mechanics, you have interesting twists and turns, you always have a task ahead of you, and every MMO since creation has slowly but surely increased its levelling speed as it went up in age. How many people have whined on the WoW boards that "damn dirty noobs" can now get a mount dirt cheap at, like, level 1 and they level up so much faster?

Time sinks are not the way of the future, and people don't quit when they don't feel like their time is being wasted.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

This is very much how I feel about it. These things are such chores because you have to unlock them all over again every damn time. It's not a problem if they're easy to get, but when they're a monumental effort, how many times am I going to bother with it? I have around 30 characters, probably around 20 of which are applicable for the Vanguard pieces. But that means, by average estimate, 80-100 raids. Not good.

Like I said before - if these things need to be expensive, make them unlock account-wide. That way, you can make them even MORE expensive, but I'll know all of this "hard work" isn't going to waste and I won't have to do it all over again. That, and I'll get them at character creation. It's not the work I'm as opposed to (even though I feel work and game are incompatible), but more the fact that it's a lot of work to do over and over again.

Either make them cheaper, or make the work in unlocking them mean more.

And if people have too many Vanguard merits? Costumes aren't the solution. More and more exotic Vanguard temporary powers, or even accolades, are the answer. Seriously, with a single-use Vanguard heavy at 250, how much Merits does someone need to have to have too many? I'd think that if I were sitting on 10 000 metirs, I'd buy and use Heavies all the time. Isn't that like Scrooge McDuck, who's constantly saying how rich he is, yet all he ever seems to do with his money is keep it in a vault and swim in them.

*edit*
Money is singular, not plural, damn it!

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

I've said a few times before (example) and PM'd a redname - Rikti O's!

As for the account-wide unlocking and stating only my opinion (so won't re-open the debate), I would prefer that doesn't happen. For my example, I earned the merits on my widow "the old fashion way" via numerous street sweeps, misions, raids, and LGTF. She spent many hours taking down Rikti and is swimming in merits. On the other hand, my dark/therm corr has done the LGTF once and apart from that, has only done the VG intro to get the badge - no other VG content. It is hard for me to answer why my corruptor should get open access to the costumes when she didn't do anything to earn those costumes.

For the OP, I wouldn't mind seeing a reduction in those prices to make them easier.