(Villains only) How evil do YOU want to be, really?
By
Anti_Product,
Posted on: 2010-04-30 24:41 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
And even the lowest ranking Praetorian cop would have to deal with new recruits wanting his job - Tyrant wants the best person in every position, and ambition for more power and fear of being replaced are for him the best motivators for making sure that not only are the best people in every position, but that they're also constantly trying to make themselves better too.
|
Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms
Of course, you're missing that even the lowest ranking 'cop' in that world has still shown he has decided to uphold Tyrant's way of life. Thus, one doesn't really need to be in a very high position to have more power than the sheep who enjoy Tyrant's ideal, yet do nothing to support it. I expect this will be like '20s movies police, rampant corruption at all ranks, with only a few good apples that actually care about the people, more than their badge.
|
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
Fun fact: When I posted this thread, I stared at the subject line for a long time and thought "Golden Girl is going to post all over this and weigh it down. How do I stop that without counter-trolling?"|
Originally Posted by Blood Spectre
What part of "Villains only" was so hard to understand?
|
After literally about 30 seconds of bouncing ways back and forth, I added the "(Villains Only)" tag to gently let people know that speaking from experience was intended to be a vital component of this thread.
Now, I don't actually mind her here right now, as the conversation has been really productive (as well as -Who am I to judge, really?-). Just... interesting that you should say that.
Quote:
More to the slaughter, then. If all the Villain cares about is a steady supply, then it probably doesn't matter if he goes to the victim, or the other way around. Someone in that position probably COULD move up if they wanted to, but that just means the people that come after their job might actually be competent.
|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
And even the lowest ranking Praetorian cop would have to deal with new recruits wanting his job
|
The Abrams is one of the most effective war machines on the planet. - R. Lee Ermy.
Q: How do you wreck an Abrams?
A: You crash into another one.
Quote:
I don't mind her posting but really is she doing much beyond demonstrating her ignorance of red side?
|
Originally Posted by Marcian Tobay
Fun fact: When I posted this thread, I stared at the subject line for a long time and thought "Golden Girl is going to post all over this and weigh it down. How do I stop that without counter-trolling?"
After literally about 30 seconds of bouncing ways back and forth, I added the "(Villains Only)" tag to gently let people know that speaking from experience was intended to be a vital component of this thread. Now, I don't actually mind her here right now, as the conversation has been really productive (as well as -Who am I to judge, really?-). Just... interesting that you should say that. |
total kick to the gut
This is like having Ra's Al Ghul show up at your birthday party.
Quote:
That's my point. There is a lot of interesting conversation happening but there's also one person who knows next to nothing about the topic who keeps chiming in.
|
Originally Posted by SwellGuy
I don't mind her posting but really is she doing much beyond demonstrating her ignorance of red side?
|
Paragon Unleashed, Unleash Yourself!
It's worth reiterating that no opinions expressed here need to be refuted or even addressed in order for change for the better to happen. Prolific posting does not make anyone important - far from it, in fact.
Edited to add: If someone says something so wrong that it motivates a better-informed person to post a thorough and well-considered counterargument, that is worthwhile, even if the wrong person goes on being blithely wrong.
@SPTrashcan
Avatar by Toxic_Shia
Why MA ratings should be changed from stars to "like" or "dislike"
A better algorithm for ordering MA arcs
Quote:
Oh Reginald.....|
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
It's worth reiterating that no opinions expressed here need to be refuted or even addressed in order for change for the better to happen. Prolific posting does not make anyone important - far from it, in fact.
Edited to add: If someone says something so wrong that it motivates a better-informed person to post a thorough and well-considered counterargument, that is worthwhile, even if the wrong person goes on being blithely wrong. |
But anyway, that's just it, it's hard for me to take the entire discussion seriously, (for lack of a better word) when every other post is from someoene who, regardless of post history mind you, really has no idea about the subject matter.
Paragon Unleashed, Unleash Yourself!
Quote:
That's a variation of my theory: By asking basic questions and adding pedestrian comments*, she's given people a focal point around which to center their posts.|
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
Edited to add: If someone says something so wrong that it motivates a better-informed person to post a thorough and well-considered counterargument, that is worthwhile, even if the wrong person goes on being blithely wrong.
|
*Seriously no offense meant GG. Just sayin' that you can't have perspective, just interpretation of what you've seen as an outsider.
Quote:
That's my point as well. It's not personal, but there's a reason I don't comment on the STF. I've never done it, and I know I'm not conversant in it. This thread is the same way.
|
Originally Posted by Marcian Tobay
*Seriously no offense meant GG. Just sayin' that you can't have perspective, just interpretation of what you've seen as an outsider. |
Paragon Unleashed, Unleash Yourself!
Quote:
Wel, that's only a theory about the Ghouls - form the Hero Con panel, they made it sound like the 90% died.|
Originally Posted by Marcian Tobay
Is this hypothesis? I thought we didn't know any specifics besides that 90% were "volunteered", which we all assume means "killed".
Edit: I see you retconned in a response.  |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33ko78TeO5I
17:40 for some Powers Division stuff
19:40 for the promotion system
23:30 onwards for the non-RPing part of the panel, with the truth about Tyrant, as well as the bit about the 10% who survive the indoctrination process - and if you keep it going until 25:00, you'll even hear the bonus of Tyrant's government being described as a totalitarian regime
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
As a child of a totalitarian state (former Soviet block here), I can testify that the more oppressive a regime becomes, the greater the power of the people the regime actually favours. If you have "connections," then the rules don't apply to you, you don't have to wait in line, you don't have to pay, you don't have to go through usual channels. This remains a MAJOR mentality problem of the old Soviet republics even to this day, to the point where we have a word for it that I just can't translate.|
Originally Posted by Marcian Tobay
It's been a pet theory of mine that Loyalists that prove themselves after a while get more freedom than the average citizen, as part of the truly f'd up nature of Tyrant's system. Or, to put it another way: "Communism is actually quite lucrative!" (Archer, episode 4: Honeypot).
But that's a theory, and I suspect that you're more correct. |
As such, I can easily see how, while the common folk in Praetoria are oppressed, the more privileged few who actually have Tyrant's favour would have a lot more operational freedom. Basically, the "one death is a tragedy, a million deaths are a statistic" approach, where the few in power matter and the many underfoot simply don't count.
Clearly, a totalitarian regime will do its utmost to make loyal citizens content as long as they toe the line. However, and I have seen this first-hand, a totalitarian regime will never shy away from breaking its own rules for its leaders and would not shy away from just throwing people in jail if they felt like it.
Hence, good writing permitting, there's no reason the chosen few loyalists (that is, all of us - the players) can't have amazing freedom of action similar to what a Spectre would get in Mass Effect a Grammaton Cleric would get in Equilibrium. Again, it comes down to writing, and if D-Mac is any indication, the writing is there even now.
Quote:
|
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.
|
And honestly, even if half of the posts in this thread are GG, this thread would be far less than half as long without her presence. She provokes responses.
The downside is that she's not a very good gauge of what constitutes a convincing argument, because A) she has no particular interest in facts, knowledge, or experience, and B) nothing changes her mind, ever. But once you keep this in mind, it's all good.
Now, a bit more on the topic. It's clearly the case that neither heroes nor villains can win in the sense of creating a change so great it affects the shared world. But in fact, heroes fail all the time - not just in the sense of impermanent change, but canonically. Countess Crey lawyers up and walks away. Villains are thrown in the Zig, only to break right out again. Blue Steel swoops in and saves the day when you can't. Plots are foiled, but the plotters escape. Player villains would like to be afforded the same courtesy: to plot, and fail, and escape.
@SPTrashcan
Avatar by Toxic_Shia
Why MA ratings should be changed from stars to "like" or "dislike"
A better algorithm for ordering MA arcs
Quote:
That only works up to the point where GG turns herself into Chicken Little. I'm already there, because it's not worth arguing with someone who simply ignores arguments and restates opinions as fact. I just have to wonder how long that effect will last. How long did it take for Friggin' Tazer to lose his edge?|
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
And honestly, even if half of the posts in this thread are GG, this thread would be far less than half as long without her presence. She provokes responses.
|
Quote:
| Now, a bit more on the topic. It's clearly the case that neither heroes nor villains can win in the sense of creating a change so great it affects the shared world. But in fact, heroes fail all the time - not just in the sense of impermanent change, but canonically. Countess Crey lawyers up and walks away. Villains are thrown in the Zig, only to break right out again. Blue Steel swoops in and saves the day when you can't. Plots are foiled, but the plotters escape. Player villains would like to be afforded the same courtesy: to plot, and fail, and escape. |
Again, stop THREATENING me that bad things are going to happen. DO them and let me fight them anyway. The game shouldn't be so afraid to have me thrown in a Paragon City jail. That just means I'll break out again. It shouldn't be afraid to give me the wrath of Arachnos, either. Be a fun change of pace to get into a few SERIOUS scrapes with them from time to time, not just lopping off cells that Recluse doesn't care about.
Quote:
|
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.
|
Quote:
Your points are reasonable, but I can't really follow any conversation where I need to keep all of those downsides in mind so often. It's just too much to ask of any subject.|
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
And honestly, even if half of the posts in this thread are GG, this thread would be far less than half as long without her presence. She provokes responses.
The downside is that she's not a very good gauge of what constitutes a convincing argument, because A) she has no particular interest in facts, knowledge, or experience, and B) nothing changes her mind, ever. But once you keep this in mind, it's all good. Now, a bit more on the topic. It's clearly the case that neither heroes nor villains can win in the sense of creating a change so great it affects the shared world. But in fact, heroes fail all the time - not just in the sense of impermanent change, but canonically. Countess Crey lawyers up and walks away. Villains are thrown in the Zig, only to break right out again. Blue Steel swoops in and saves the day when you can't. Plots are foiled, but the plotters escape. Player villains would like to be afforded the same courtesy: to plot, and fail, and escape. |
And in reply to your on topic discourse; I don't have much of a problem with the existing villain arcs. Not as much as other people do. I made my expectations of villain content in terms of evil known earlier in the thread, before they were drowned out behind a tide of winking nonsense. But these 2 new ones are certainly better.
Paragon Unleashed, Unleash Yourself!
Quote:
This is actually an interesting point. Many systems of privilege are built around the idea that some people are simply superior to others: men and supermen. These systems are fundamentally wrong and inefficient because humans are more similar than they are different and the variation between the groups tends to be dwarfed by the variation within the groups.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Basically, the "one death is a tragedy, a million deaths are a statistic" approach, where the few in power matter and the many underfoot simply don't count.
|
However, our characters live in a fictional universe where some people are literally, factually, demonstrably and incontrovertibly superior. There are people in this universe who have dozens or hundreds of times the strength and durability of an ordinary human, and those are the easiest to deal with. It is conceivable that if the world is divided into humans and superhumans, the balance of power will lie with the superhumans.
Under this interpretation, some variation of Lord Recluse's social darwinism actually makes sense. Note that his entire organization, from government and social problems to research and training, is designed to create an environment that an ordinary human being cannot survive. While the heroic metahumans are spending time, effort, and resources on protecting and preserving non-metas, Recluse is filtering the ones with potential to play on the grand stage and simply discarding the rest.
Consider also that his policies are informed by people who can actually see the future. What do they see that could make this kind of brutal culling of unhelpful baggage seem necessary?
(Note: Recluse as written is a mere dictator. It's not my intention to refute this, but to demonstrate that it wouldn't be hard to write him as an uncompromising visionary.)
@SPTrashcan
Avatar by Toxic_Shia
Why MA ratings should be changed from stars to "like" or "dislike"
A better algorithm for ordering MA arcs
Except that it's not his vision really. Arachnos was practicing those policies before he took over. He's merely kept them in place and even stepped them up.
Paragon Unleashed, Unleash Yourself!
I have a pet theory that "leader of Arachnos" is merely the title awarded to whoever scrambles to the top of the heap, and Arachnos itself runs on its own momentum. This would also be a satisfactory explanation for why a villain wouldn't want to "take over Arachnos" - it's just a way to make yourself a target for the next ambitious thug.
@SPTrashcan
Avatar by Toxic_Shia
Why MA ratings should be changed from stars to "like" or "dislike"
A better algorithm for ordering MA arcs
Quote:
That's not so much a theory as it is an undeniable fact. It's worked out for Recluse thus far because, as one of maybe 2 Incarnates active on Earth, he's pretty much invincible to the rest of the organization.|
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
I have a pet theory that "leader of Arachnos" is merely the title awarded to whoever scrambles to the top of the heap, and Arachnos itself runs on its own momentum. This would also be a satisfactory explanation for why a villain wouldn't want to "take over Arachnos" - it's just a way to make yourself a target for the next ambitious thug.
|
The events of Time After Time notwithstanding.
Paragon Unleashed, Unleash Yourself!
Quote:
You only really need one reason why our Villains don't want to take over the world. Ruling the world is really, really boring. It's just as bad if the Heroes 'win', too. Congratulations, there's no more crime in the world. Enjoy your new job at Taco Bell.
|
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
I have a pet theory that "leader of Arachnos" is merely the title awarded to whoever scrambles to the top of the heap, and Arachnos itself runs on its own momentum. This would also be a satisfactory explanation for why a villain wouldn't want to "take over Arachnos" - it's just a way to make yourself a target for the next ambitious thug.
|
The Abrams is one of the most effective war machines on the planet. - R. Lee Ermy.
Q: How do you wreck an Abrams?
A: You crash into another one.
Quote:
Interestingly, at Pax East, we learnt that the Praetorian zones are islands, and as both Tyrant and Recluse seem to govern using "survival of the fittest" as the base of their system, it might be possible that Tyrant rules his world from the Praetorian Rogue Isles.|
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
This is actually an interesting point. Many systems of privilege are built around the idea that some people are simply superior to others: men and supermen. These systems are fundamentally wrong and inefficient because humans are more similar than they are different and the variation between the groups tends to be dwarfed by the variation within the groups.
However, our characters live in a fictional universe where some people are literally, factually, demonstrably and incontrovertibly superior. There are people in this universe who have dozens or hundreds of times the strength and durability of an ordinary human, and those are the easiest to deal with. It is conceivable that if the world is divided into humans and superhumans, the balance of power will lie with the superhumans. Under this interpretation, some variation of Lord Recluse's social darwinism actually makes sense. Note that his entire organization, from government and social problems to research and training, is designed to create an environment that an ordinary human being cannot survive. While the heroic metahumans are spending time, effort, and resources on protecting and preserving non-metas, Recluse is filtering the ones with potential to play on the grand stage and simply discarding the rest. Consider also that his policies are informed by people who can actually see the future. What do they see that could make this kind of brutal culling of unhelpful baggage seem necessary? (Note: Recluse as written is a mere dictator. It's not my intention to refute this, but to demonstrate that it wouldn't be hard to write him as an uncompromising visionary.) |
I posted this in another thread:
Quote:
|
I was thinking about this dev quote from PAX about the how you can see the changing look of the new zones: "...as you're flying over one Praetroian island to the next..." And it made me think that maybe the GR storyline might take place on the Praetorian Rogue Isles - like the Praetorian Marcus Cole rules the world from his tower on the very same island that the Primal Earth Stefan Richter plots to take over the world in his tower. And things like the Seers also makes me think that with the death of the Praetorian Richter, Arachnos might have developed in a different way, and maybe been absorbed into Tyrant's plans and his government - so that Praetorian Earth would in fact be, technically, a world run by Arahcnos, because they had Marcus Cole as their leader and not Stefan Richter - which I think would be a very cool and ironic touch. Like the only place Recluse's organization succeeded was in a universe where they were led by his arch-enemy. |
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
Given that Ghost Widow is bound to Arachnos itself, rather than its current leader, that may well be the case. At the very least, it lends credence that such a line of thinking actually exists. It also makes Recluse that much less compelling. For a guy who fell over backwards into super powers (exaggerating, obviously) and took an organisation ready-made, from the The Weaver, I believe, he really hasn't done much to integrate himself into Arachnos. He basically yanked its previous leader out of his seat and sat down on his spot, but Arachnos remains an entity unto itself ASIDE from him.|
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
I have a pet theory that "leader of Arachnos" is merely the title awarded to whoever scrambles to the top of the heap, and Arachnos itself runs on its own momentum. This would also be a satisfactory explanation for why a villain wouldn't want to "take over Arachnos" - it's just a way to make yourself a target for the next ambitious thug.
|
Put it this way - Recluse is chasing his own agendas, often ones that don't feature a bright future for the rest of Arachnos, and he's using the whole organisation as one giant pile of red shirts. Fitting for a villainous plotted, of course, and I dare say quite respectable in its own right, but this REALLY isn't the kind of guy anyone with all his brain lobes intact would want to follow. He's not after a brighter future for Arachnos. He's after a brighter future for himself. Which makes our obsession with serving Recluse - a narrative device which tells me the mission designers were trying to paint him as the end-all, be-all - so confounding. It's almost as if whoever wrote the story bible about the then-unnamed spider-themed villain group and its leader didn't leave enough source material behind and whoever actually did the villain-side content completely missed the original intent.
All throughout City of Villains, blatant clues in the plot structure point to Recluse as a selfish fraud who's using Arachnos for his own ends, right down to Operation: Destiny. His head is always in the clouds dreaming of Statesmen jumping over a wall, and all of Arachnos ends up bending to his will. And for what? No-one seems to like him. And yet the narrative not only paints us as Recluse fanboys, it actually seems to assume Recluse is the man to strive to work for, hence why I feel there is a serious disconnect in story bibles here.
Basically, the game is trying to sell a guy riding the coat tails of The Weaver as a magnanimous leader we should all want to follow? Go to hell! Recluse doesn't deserve to be the Mary Sue that he is.
Quote:
|
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.
|
Given the kind of disaster that Statesman is canonically capable of causing, perhaps Arachnos needs a figurehead with a monomaniacal obsession with killing the man and the strength to do it.
Statesman: the greatest threat to all dimensions.
Heh.
@SPTrashcan
Avatar by Toxic_Shia
Why MA ratings should be changed from stars to "like" or "dislike"
A better algorithm for ordering MA arcs
It doesn't occur to you that Recluse is this way so that ultimately, in Time After Time, it's believable that half of Arachnos would defect to follow you?
Paragon Unleashed, Unleash Yourself!
Edit: I see you retconned in a response.