End of Cottage Rule? Please?

I apologize for not clarifying - you have a good guess but are still wrong. That post does nothing whatsoever for the powers I am thinking about. Let's talk about all the targetted phase shift powers, let's talk about poison trap in /Poison, let's talk about Time Bomb, let's talk about...

I think you get the idea.

That has always been the case so you haven't posted anything worthwhile, nothing personal. The idea is to make more sets like many of the newer ones, where it makes it harder to skip powers as they will all be useful.

Don't make personal attacks on me for understanding all of what you are saying and disagreeing with it.

I realize that this forum allows you to be an anonymous super hero fan but that doesn't mean you can skip growing up. Honestly, several statements you have made are rather rude, mean, and personal.

How can anyone take you seriously after that?

Then show some actual comprehension of what is being discussed and make a cohesive argument about why, as opposed to "Dear god end it!" and "The crying will stop. Because, quite frankly, you do NOT show any understanding of it, nor do you make any sort of actual argument or partake in any sort of discussion actually laying out your disagreements.
I question knowledge you quite publicly seem to resist wanting to admit having, such as what the cottage rule is and its purpose. If you don't like being called out on it, prove I'm wrong. Somehow I think you can't.

I note you still don't seem to have gained an understanding of the rule, or clarified beyond "I want!" why you think it should go away, what massive issue it causes (or that removing it would solve.)

To turn your own question back on you, how do you expect anyone to take you seriously with that?

I've laid out explanation of it, with example and conversation. Which quite obviously you have't bothered reading. Much like the discussion of what the cottage rule *is,* examples and purpose. You... "End it, people will stop crying over time." And assigning some nonsense holy mission to right some drastic wrong to yourself, with statements like:
That reads as "What *I* want is all that matters, screw game balance, history or anyone else, and don't worry about how flimsy my reasons or lacking in understanding of why that directive is in place is!"

Hmmm.

No, I can't take you the slightest bit seriously, and shan't. I question your understanding and grasp of it, and you've said and done *nothing* to change my mind on your lack of comprehension.

Edit:

And in fact another post of yours quite frankly proves it.

Every power you mention there - and you'll find absolutely zero argument from me that such things as Time Bomb or Poison's Poison Trap - can be rectified with adjustment, with absolutely *zero* need to throw out the cottage rule, and many suggestions on how to fix said powers *have* been made that sit perfectly comfortably in with said rule. The fact you mention them after insisting it needs to be thrown out tells me QUITE well you do not have a grasp on what it is.

Now, if you'd *like* to have a discussion on them, I'll be more than happy to proceed with you. In fact, some of the powers you mention in your list there *have* already been touched on (such as making the various phase powers toggles, or letting PVE get the PVP "Phase can affect phase" ability... none of which changes the basic purpose of the power, IE, none of which violate the cottage rule.) Time Bomb? Placed nuke. It can be adjusted to be user controlled, or changed to be like the Omega Maneuver - shorter duration, a taunt to draw enemies to it, etc. - which, again, does not change its foundational purpose.

See my Guides and Tutorials

They really can't buff the damage too much. Sure, Defenders don't get much out of it, but Controllers on the other hand get some decent AoE out of it when Containment damage is applied. If you buff the damage of the power, it could quickly end up being overpowered when Controllers get their hands on it.

You can't change a power across the board without looking at ALL archetypes it is available for. And besides, it's a helluva lot better than it used to be. Remember when it was a power you cast on your ally that knocked everything away from him? I can't think of a better way to kill an Invuln tank.

Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately.

I have seen houses jacked up, and the foundation torn out and replaced. It would have been ridiculous to say that the foundation was not going to be replaced because there was a renter living in the house.

The point is you don’t set an arbitrary rule that says you cant repair something that is broken. It does not matter what the rule says or why it supposedly says anything. If the Devs don’t want to do something to a power or a set, then they take the responsibility for the decision. Cottage Rule is a form of Dev passing the buck, and it's a ridiculous form. It's not like it's a fricken law of nature.

It's also confusing. Would taking the Stalker's AS out of the level 6 slot, placing it in the level 1 slot and moving the rest of the powers up in slot position, violate the Cottage Rule. This should have been done before Villains was released. Not having this immediately available is no different then not allowing MMs to have pets until level 6. It was asinine that this was not immediately fixed, and here it's 6+ years later and it's still not fixed. Is that because of the "Cottage Rule"?

Okay. Hold up.

If you do actually understand both sides of the issue, which powers are such big mistakes that they NEED to be removed?

So... you do not agree with the Cottage rule...

But you do not understand why the developers obey the Cottage rule.

*headtilt* ... ... hang on a minute... Did you not just say you understood both sides of the issue?

I need a diagram just to figure out what you are trying say.

So let's start over.

Can you, if possible, give us a list of powers that are so awful, such big mistakes, that the only possible way to fix those mistakes is to REMOVE said powers?

So far throughout this thread every power that somebody has claimed "needs" to be removed has fallen into two categories:

• A: shown to either be an excellent utility power
• B: can be adjusted within the cottage rules

Nobody, as of yet, has been able to provide an example of a power so bad that the only possible solution to players not using it is to simply delete the entire power outright.

If something is some overwhelmingly broken that it just needs to be flat out replaced, then the Devs will likely do that. However, I have yet to see an example of that in the game right now. As M_B has been saying, the powers that most people complain about could be fixed within the confines of the Cottage Rule. I haven't seen a power listed here that needs to be changed otherwise.

And Stalkers should in no way get AS at level 1. It's completely unnecessary at that level, and would leave them sitting around for most of a fight against three minions, let alone the fact that without another attack, if AS got interrupted, they wouldn't be able to attack at all at level 1. AS is where it is precisely to NOT make it broken. That's not a problem with the power.

Adding an effect would not violate the cottage rule.

Um. You do know that the Cottage rule is not about this?

There is nothing in the Cottage rule that says the devs cannot repair broken powers.

So... the rules don't matter?

Yep. There have been several times when developers have outright stated that a power is working as intended.

Woah. Hold Up.

You need to explain here why the Cottage Rule is passing the buck.

Were you not around when the developers tried changing out powers... you know... "crappy, sucky powers that nobody liked" type of thing with wholesale deletion?

Are you aware that their attempts to delete and replace powers are why all the Patron / Ancillary powerpools are now FIVE choices instead of four choices?

Fact is, the player-base revolted.

Um. Okay?

What does a law of nature have to do with a video game?

I mean, City of Heroes isn't exactly an Orange sitting on a tree?

Woah Woah Woah Woah Whoah Woah.

Did you seriously, without joking, just say that the developers should have put an attack:

• with a really long interrupt time
• with a really long recharge time
• does mediocre to no damage outside of /hide
• has to be used from /hide for maximum damage

Did you really just say that attack should have been the FIRST attack Stalkers should have gotten?

I'm sorry, you just completely ruined what-ever credibility you thought you had. I can't take you seriously after that statement.

The simple fact is this: By placing the Assassin's Attack at level 6 all stalkers are forced to accept at least one... ONE attack outside of the Assassin's attack. Why is that such a big deal?

Tell me you don't remember the days of seeing builds like ... this one... running around.







Now imagine if I was a new player who did that with Assassin's Attack as my primary power choice.

Um.

Masterminds get pets at level 1.



Wow.

Just. Wow.

*edit*

Before I get a "oh but it used to be like that" type of response... I went over to Paragonwiki and checked the history on the Mastermind page, specifically the 2005 post by Man with the Plan: http://paragonwiki.com/w/index.php?t...nd&oldid=82746

So even back when the game first launched... 00:24, 3 November 2005 ... Mastermind's were able to select their first pet power at level 1.

*edit*

Second edit. The thought occurred to me that maybe the poster I just spent this post ripping apart was somehow trying to compare the obtention of Mastermind's pet to the obtention of a Stalker's Assassin's Attack. If that was the poster's intent... well. I don't think it changes anything else typed here.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/asinine

1. See foolish.

Okay. You got this badly backwards.

I'm sorry, but, you don't know what you are talking about here, and I'm going to be blunt.

Maybe I can put this terms you can understand.

U B3 T3H asinine 1 H3R3 M473.

Um. No. These haven't been fixed because these are not BROKEN.

For starters, you clearly do not know what you are talking about with Masterminds. You didn't even BOTHER to log into the game and check to see if what you were typing was even accurate.

Given that one of your primary examples was based on... I have no idea what... it does not leave me convinced that I can explain to you why stalkers can get 3 other damaging attacks before the Assassin's Attack.

*edit*

Okay, accepting for a second that your original intent was to say that Stalkers should have gotten their signature attack at the same time Mastermind's get their signature pet ... this is... well. Just as senseless.

Maybe I can try and break this down very simply.

The developers intended design is that all players will have at least one single quick recharging attack in their power-sets... no matter how the player designs their archtype.

This ensures that on some level a player will be able to participate in combat.

If the developers did what you wanted, it would be possible to create a stalker that would have nothing but the assassin's attack... and would be completely useless except when hidden and using that attack.

Mastermind's get a semi-pass on this with their pets. It is possible to take a Mastermind to level 50 without taking any of the three native attacks. However, this is why the first tier of Mastermind pets are combat pets. The minion pets still fill the combat role of giving the Mastermind something to attack with.

On some level both the developers and the players have to accept that Mastermind's are a bit more complex than other archtypes, and thus have different requirements to play. This design acceptence is one of the reasons Mastermind's are being placed behind a pay-wall for CoH: Freedom.

Adding an effect, such as -regen or -healing, probably wouldn't go against the "cottage rule". An example of this is Burn where they added in a fear effect, and then eventually removed it in the latest iteration.

Originally Posted by PapaSlade Rangle's right....this is fun.

Again, there is nothing in that rule that states it. Yes, even to the point of replacing a power.

HOwever, if some people had their way here, it would be done so arbitrarily - "I don't like this power, we'll turn it completely into something else!" that there would be no point, no logic, no order to any of the sets or changes. And if you want to know what happens when they do that - again, look at what happened when they *tried* to replace so-called "unpopular" powers in the Patron pools.

Also,
(a) No, moving a power does not violate the cottage rule. It does not change what that power does. Tanks had this done with Taunt once already, and
(b) you need to get your facts straight. Masterminds have ALWAYS been able to summon their first tier pet at level 1, unless they choose an attack instead. ALWAYS.
And (c) if you *really* think Assassin's Strike - a long, interruptable attack - should be at level 1, you really need to rethink things. No, that should not have been put at level 1, and I say this as someone who plays multiple stalkers. AS at level 1 would make stalkers even LESS popular, thanks to no armor, no backup attacks, no *anything* to help either combat or survivability.

See my Guides and Tutorials

Couldnt they instead make it so a particular damage buffed power doesnt get effected by Containment?

They do it with Scrapper's Crit and certain powers.

You're right. It doesn't.

Which (and this isn't directed at you) has been stated multiple times in this and other threads, but which keeps getting conveniently ignored by some people - that a power can be changed, sometimes drastically, without contravening the cottage rule - without changing the powers *basic purpose.*

See my Guides and Tutorials

I have yet to see anyone arguing that the cottage rule should not be followed actually bring up an example where, yes, that is truly the only way to rectify a situation.

So, if you know of these cases, feel free to list them, with justifications. I'll bet they can all be made "acceptable" without violating said rule. I can think of perhaps one power, total, that could be removed wholesale in one instance because it's so out of place to me.

See my Guides and Tutorials

because this dev team has always done this.

I don't agree with jay on his cottage rule stance but that exert the above quote quoted was pretty spot on.

No you just always assume they do which is why 9/10 you're comletely wrong and disregarded

Yeah I think Bill is misunderstanding us, if anything. He sure got on defense as quick as possible, didn't he?

Bill's not misunderstanding. You and the poster you quoted are.

Please tell us which powers are so broken to need removing from the game.

Then we'll show you how they are either 1) not actually broken or 2) able to be fixed without violating the cottage rule that you don't understand.

I don't think he does misunderstand you. I think he understands quite well, especially after he likely say the beta outrage at the changes to the patron power pools. I think that people like you vastly underestimate how many people use, and like, the powers that you consider underpowered.

And I've still yet to see you give an example of a power that is so broken it couldn't be fixed within the constraints of the cottage rule.

So, in other words, you do not want an actual discussion.

I note you have no reply to the points made, nor an example of a power so broken the only way to fix it is to replace it instead of making changes within the cottage rule.

As I posted in reply to MajorPrankster:
Do you *have* an answer to that? Can you provide those examples? Because the four you've listed so far can easily be fixed without violation of the cottage rule. The fix might be somewhat extreme - but it does not require removal of the power or a change to the base function.

But, of course, it seems - like so much in this thread - you've chosen to ignore that.

Here. Simple format.
Power:
Set:
AT(s) affected:
What is wrong with the power:
Why an adjustment cannot fix it, so it needs replacing:
What my fix would be:

See my Guides and Tutorials

Hee. hee..On this topic, I wonder how many toons have been deleted because they were "Too Easy?"

To me, playing a toon that survives EVERYTHING would be horribad boring...unless you were a farmer of course...but when you are farming you are just defeating the same enemy type over,and over, and over, again which really is not "Playing."

Being perfect in this game, to me, is a flaw

Lisa-Needs her lunch