Your opinion welcome...

So, like most of you, I am excited about the upcoming Going Rogue expansion... already pre-ordered it all shiny and everything... dusted off a shelf in my harddrive for it too...

One of the things I am looking forward to the most is being able to have Villain ATs Hero side and Hero ATs Villain side... But this got me thinking...

We know we will be able to take existing characters and alignment switch them via a process which the developers have estimated as taking a week for the "casual player." But, what about brand new characters?

So, my question is this... what is your expectation/wish?

Do you want...

1) Only heroes available at character creation blue-side, only villains selectable red-side and BOTH selectable if you start out in Praetoria... and once those characters finish with Praetorian content they can go to either Paragon or the Rogue Isles...

2) As one above, but travel to and from Primal Earth can basically happen at whatever level you want, so you can create a starting villain AT in Praetoria and zip over to Paragon City for a few radio missions for lunch before zooming back to Praetoria to slam some contact mish's all before reaching 8th level.

or...

3) ALL ATs are available for ANY starting point (Rogue, Paragon or Praetoria) but once you select either Blue or Red side your alignment is locked in until you complete the alignment change requirements.

Personally, I would prefer the third option. I want to create a heroic MasterMind without having them first have to "realize the error of their ways" or be a Praetorian with a trans-dimensional Work Visa. I don't mind being locked into a zone until I reach a minimum level, but I want maximum fluidity when creating my characters.

How about the rest of you? What are your expectations and/or hopes for this system?

From what I've gathered from dev chats etc. is the following.

If you start in Paragon, you can only select the hero ATs, if you start in the Rogue Isles, you can only select the villain ATs but...

If you start in Praetoria you can select any of them and once you hit level 20 you get the chance to make a choice and go to either Paragon City OR the Rogue Isles with that AT.

Now for higher levels you have to do your alignment altering missions, with one step per week (so hero to vigilante one week and then vigilante to villain the next week) as mentioned by Positron on the EU Q&A on test.

I like it the way it's going to be. And for the time that it takes for the side-switching, I do not want to feel as though I'm falling or redeeming TOO quickly. I think 2 weeks should be reasonable, but I will find out for sure when...if I get into Beta.

I would LIKE it to be completely open, but I accept that that's not the way it will be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dispari I don't know why Dink thinks she's not as sexy as Jay was. In 5 posts she's already upstaged his entire career.

I'd much prefer it if you could choose to start any AT in either zone.

Nothing in the game mechanics of any archetype is innately good or evil.

With the way it's going to be, if you have an idea for a stealthy melee hero (eg Batman, Invisible Kid from the Legion) you're forced into making them in Praetoria or the Rogue isles and then playing through some missions that make them become good. Why not allow the player to just start off in Paragon instead of dancing that dance for 20 levels?

I'll jump through hoops to play the game the way I want if I have to, but I'd much prefer there not being any hoops in the way.

I now have an image of a doctor gravely explaining to some crying parents that due to their baby's high bone density, he is destined to be a Tanker and thus cannot remain with them in the Etoiles.

I accept that starting alignments will be restricted by archetype, but I cannot discern the fictional or mechanical reason why this should be so. There may be a practical reason: it could be that archetype is not an independent value from alignment in the character creation process, so that trying to make a villain tanker would shunt you over into creating a brute (for instance). This would be pretty silly, but then again they did roll their own market database. In that case, I would just like to note my strong preference for independent side and alignment and hope that the code team will have time in the future to implement it.

I see the side-switch limitation being the result of perhaps a couple factors:

The 'Why not before' thing. Sure, they could have had villainous controllers as of Issue 6. But they didn't. Why should they now? As a player, the archetype has far less to do with a character's alignment and costume than their powers, but a changeover is now explained via the side switching mechanic, rather than being discarded.

I know it's minor, but the AT descriptors are often very faction based. Heck, some are functionaly leaning one way or the other. (See scourge vs. vigilance.) Though there are odd ones: containment always seem villainous to me. I know a text change would be simple enough, but it's there.

As to what I'd desire?

For the most part, I'd have no problem with all but khelds/arachnos selectable from level 1, either side. While You can say your tanker is the pinnacle of heroism, protecting as many as he can, I can make a big monster that's nigh indestructible that terrorizes the populace whilst drawing their ire. Don't get me started on blasters.

When I see Steelclaw as the thread author I come to expect a list. No list here. It might be I have typecasted SC as a list maker. Sorry.

//Jack