Quote:
Bliss, where you are, then?|
Originally Posted by Mr_Kingkillaha
The question is not about why don't they allow it now. It is about why shouldn't they ever allow it? I'll point out again that this is the suggestion forum, where it is perfectly acceptable to ignore what the devs have said in the past in order to discuss the future.
|
You may ignore it if you want. If so, you learn nothing. There are reasons the devs say no to things. Sometimes it's a technical (or manpower or financial) reason. Sometimes it's game direction and if the idea matches what they want out of the game or not. Learn why they say no to certain things, and work with it. Just saying "I'm just going to ignore it" is useless.
Quote:
Anyway, enough semantical bs, free alignment changes would be awesome. Prove me wrong 
|
Here's how you'd get me to agree to an alignment change token:
- It sends you ONLY to full hero or full villain
- It locks you out of the Alignment/Tip system completely. No more merits. No more tips. No changing your mind. For your entire account.
You want to skip the system, you get to skip the system. Permanently.
Quote:
That's a fair compromise I could live with.
|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Here's how you'd get me to agree to an alignment change token:
- It sends you ONLY to full hero or full villain - It locks you out of the Alignment/Tip system completely. No more merits. No more tips. No changing your mind. For your entire account. You want to skip the system, you get to skip the system. Permanently. |
Quote:
Sorry Charlie. The devs already made their decision so I don't have to prove anything. You are the one arguing for change so it's on your head to prove that your idea is sound.|
Originally Posted by Mr_Kingkillaha
The question is not about why don't they allow it now. It is about why shouldn't they ever allow it? I'll point out again that this is the suggestion forum, where it is perfectly acceptable to ignore what the devs have said in the past in order to discuss the future.
You do realize that nothing in this game would ever progress if the devs weren't capable of changing their minds, right? "The devs said so" is not a valid objection to a suggestion that is in reference to a future change. Anyway, enough semantical bs, free alignment changes would be awesome. Prove me wrong |
Merely repeatedly proclaiming your opinion to be awesome doesn't cut the mustard.
Quote:
Because they aren't necessary. You're looking for an easy way around a system that is already easy in and of itself. Also, because I've yet to hear a meaningful argument in favour of such a system other than I want it. This, to me, represents an irresponsible approach to character-making, in that people expect to make a character on the wrong side AND still get to swap it to the right side instantly. If you intentionally choose to make a compromise, you stick with it.|
Originally Posted by O_MegaMan
My question is, as it has always been: what makes alignment change tokens so fundamentally distasteful? What is wrong with them, and what is with people's undying opposition to them?
|
I agree - having to make a character on the wrong side sucks. The developers clearly also agree, since they're giving us a way to start almost any AT on either side. You're getting what you want, there's no room to ask for more. Especially now that you have options. If your character needs to switch sides, then have him switch sides. If you don't want to go through Rogue stuff, then reroll. This doesn't need to be any easier than it already 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.
|
But for characters already made, possibly years ago, when such options weren't available, having to jump through hoops just for the sake of jumping kind of sucks. It's not gameplay, it's a chore.
Just sayin'.
I know at least one person in this thread who feels that the lack of (free) side changing as of CoV's launch was a flaw in the game's design, which is now, finally, being corrected. We should pay when the devs fix bugs?
My characters at Virtueverse
Faces of the City
Quote:
4 hours of game time isn't a big deal.|
Originally Posted by Megajoule
But for characters already made, possibly years ago, when such options weren't available, having to jump through hoops just for the sake of jumping kind of sucks. It's not gameplay, it's a chore.
Just sayin'. |
Quote:
| I know at least one person in this thread who feels that the lack of (free) side changing as of CoV's launch was a flaw in the game's design, which is now, finally, being corrected. We should pay when the devs fix bugs? |
I know because I was in the same Virtue SG as Saros the heroic Brute. I always got a kick out of seeing a new person at a Hami raid trying to figure out how a brute got there.
Quote:
But it *is* gameplay. |
Originally Posted by Megajoule
But for characters already made, possibly years ago, when such options weren't available, having to jump through hoops just for the sake of jumping kind of sucks.
|
And if, in all the time since GR's release, you haven't "corrected" your alignment - why not? You could have multiple times over by now.
The "price" right now isn't a big deal, even if you're only on an hour a day - add a fast tip mission instead of a fast newspaper in. Even someone doing that only on weekends could have swapped several times over by now.
And having the ATs segregated by side was not a bug. They are not telling you to pay for a bug fix. Nobody is. Side switching is shown heavily in gameplay lore now, *including going through the process.* (follow Frostfire.)
That's as much a bug as having to play a TF to get the badge and/or merits for finishing it is.
Quote:
Depending on the toon, I've peeled through 20 tips+2 morality missions in under 2 hours of game time so your Mileage May Vary greatly.
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
4 hours of game time isn't a big deal.
. |
Throwing darts at the board to see if something sticks.....
Come show your resolve and fight my brute!
Tanks: Gauntlet, the streak breaker and you!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PapaSlade
Rangle's right....this is fun.
|
Quote:
Same here. I'd hit a miners strike in Sharkhead and have all my tips in less than 15 minutes. Drop the mission difficulty to the lowest setting and plow thru the tips and morality in an hour or so total of game time.
|
Originally Posted by Rangle M. Down
Depending on the toon, I've peeled through 20 tips+2 morality missions in under 2 hours of game time so your Mileage May Vary greatly.
|
Quote:
If these characters were created "years ago," then the ability to use villainous ATs for heroes wasn't available, either. If you chose to create villains and pretend they were heroes anyway, then you accepted the problem then, whether explicitly or implicitly. Just because new systems were introduced to include the options you wanted does not justify asking for this to be given freely to all characters who were made on the "wrong" side.|
Originally Posted by Megajoule
But for characters already made, possibly years ago, when such options weren't available, having to jump through hoops just for the sake of jumping kind of sucks. It's not gameplay, it's a chore.
Just sayin'. |
This is like me making a Petless Mastermind and then demanding I be given a free respec into a Dual Pistols Blaster because the callous developers forced me into making my pistoleer in the wrong AT on the wrong side of the game. When you do things that the game doesn't support, you relinquish the right to make claims of support towards them. It's really just that simple.
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:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
This is like me making a Petless Mastermind and then demanding I be given a free respec into a Dual Pistols Blaster because the callous developers forced me into making my pistoleer in the wrong AT on the wrong side of the game. When you do things that the game doesn't support, you relinquish the right to make claims of support towards them. It's really just that simple.
|
I'm glad you brought this example up Sam because it's the same thing we see every single time a new powerset is introduced to the game. There's always one person that wants to be able to change his powerset choices or even his AT because the new powerset fits his character concept better.
And we all have seen how effective that argument has been.
Quote:
Effectiveness of an argument has rarely been a deterrent to the argument being used. A radical case in point being the infamous thread generated less than 72 hours after Matt "Positron" Miller shot down power-set respecs in a question and answer session. A less radical case in point being a more recent thread over re-writing Tanker descriptions and modifying tankers that has now been updated by the thread generator to try and leverage information derived from the upcoming Issue 21 release. |
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
I'm glad you brought this example up Sam because it's the same thing we see every single time a new powerset is introduced to the game. There's always one person that wants to be able to change his powerset choices or even his AT because the new powerset fits his character concept better.
And we all have seen how effective that argument has been. |
Many players with an agenda simply do not relate "past failure" to "future failure." Just because the developers said no in the past does not mean that the developers will say no "now." Just because the idea was not liked in the past does not mean it will not be liked "now."
Where issues arrive is when players lose sight of exactly what their idea or suggestion entails or results in. When players lose grasp of factual points and rely entirely on opinion and anecdotal data... is basically when things break down.
To use myself for an example, I bang on about Linux compatibility for City of Heroes on a regular basis, and in the past months have been increasingly vulgar over NCSoft's C# based launched. I do so because I know what the traffic figures for the Mepisguides and zerias.blogspot.com guides look like. I know how many people I have personally helped get the game up and running for under Linux. I can easily point to sites like HumbleBundle as evidence that there is a Linux gamer market, and one that at first glance is in the price bracket City of Heroes targets. I can point to developers such as Valve and ID Software that have realized practical benefits in working with platform Neutral Technologies over proprietary vendor-specific technologies.
Having said that, at what point do I go from a Linux advocate trying to get NCSoft to expand the market they sell into... to a fanatic who is blinded by personal bias? At what point is my technical knowledge overshadowed by what I want to see?
The answer itself is subjective and varies from person to person. There's no hard line.
Ultimately, players are going to express their opinions, for better or for worse. Yes, there are some ideas that I really wish will go away... but such ideas probably will not.
Thank you for your support I guess.
Quote:
Obviously some of us created characters outside of the "story" of the game, and it is our own responsibility to make our characters fit what we want them to be. I have been using the alignment system to do what I want (simply because I would rather drag a villain to heroside than have a praetorian). It does work if I close my eyes long enough. Despite some of the denial in this thread though, the rules of alignment are changing. A free alignment change is not in any way necessary for this in the same way that a free rescpec is not necessary. I think the parallels are close enough to justify the suggestion though. |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
If these characters were created "years ago," then the ability to use villainous ATs for heroes wasn't available, either. If you chose to create villains and pretend they were heroes anyway, then you accepted the problem then, whether explicitly or implicitly. Just because new systems were introduced to include the options you wanted does not justify asking for this to be given freely to all characters who were made on the "wrong" side.
|
Of course in the end it is still up to me to delete my character and re roll. Thats what I was planning before I had this idea, and realistically its what I expect to do after i21. Im not trying to blame the devs for my previous choices, I just honestly see this being the same reasoning behind free respecs.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
This is like me making a Petless Mastermind and then demanding I be given a free respec into a Dual Pistols Blaster because the callous developers forced me into making my pistoleer in the wrong AT on the wrong side of the game. When you do things that the game doesn't support, you relinquish the right to make claims of support towards them. It's really just that simple.
|
Quote:
You cut out the rest of the paragraph where I explained what I was saying, so... I wont type it again I guess.|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
No they haven't. Alignment changes were added for role playing purposes. This is after all a role playing game.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
No it isn't, and you can post otherwise til you are blue in the face and it still won't be true. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
New characters don't get freespecs because they weren't created when the a power was changed. Only pre-existing characters get freespecs. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
The devs give them out to everyone because they are such nice people. That doesn't mean we are entitled to them, or anything else for free.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
The devs give out free tokens as a courtesy when the changes they make take the choice out of the players hands.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
When they change a power they give out freespecs. When they merged the server lists they gave out Global Name change tokens. When a GM generics a character's name or costume they give out a name change or costume token. When a player changes servers and loses a name they give out a name change token. The difference with alignments is that you knew full well when you created the character what your choices were for the time being. You could a. Make a straight villain and change alignments at level 20. Or b. Make a Praetorian and make a heroic villain AT from level 1. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
Everyone knew when GR was launched that everything would eventually be merged and we'd be able to make whatever we wanted regardless of faction. We even predicted that the merge would start a year after GR went live, because that's exactly how long it took them to merge CoH and CoV into one game. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
Yeah the first year that CoV was launched CoH and CoV were separate purchases and you couldn't play the both sides without buying both games.
Now if the devs came out and told people that they were separating the factions into stand alone games and any characters that were caught between factions (vigilante or Rogue) were going to be forced to one side or the other, then there would be a valid argument for being given alignment change tokens. Why? Because that's a scenario where players would actually have an alignment forced upon them. |
Quote:
This suggestion is not limited by tech. If left completely open it could go against game direction, but I think with some rules on it it could be done without ruining anything.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Bliss, where you are, then?
You may ignore it if you want. If so, you learn nothing. There are reasons the devs say no to things. Sometimes it's a technical (or manpower or financial) reason. Sometimes it's game direction and if the idea matches what they want out of the game or not. Learn why they say no to certain things, and work with it. Just saying "I'm just going to ignore it" is useless. |
To change the rules, you have to make suggestions that go against them. I dont know how to explain that any clearer.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
That is an opinion, not a fact.
Here's how you'd get me to agree to an alignment change token: - It sends you ONLY to full hero or full villain - It locks you out of the Alignment/Tip system completely. No more merits. No more tips. No changing your mind. For your entire account. You want to skip the system, you get to skip the system. Permanently. |
Okay not really
MMOs need change to stay fresh.
Well this argument hasn't gone anywhere productive for a while, so Ill post what I think would be necessary to keep a free alignment change from destroying the game and all of the known universe:
1. The character would have to be 20 or below. Characters that COULD have already changed SHOULD have already changed.
2. The alignment freespec would wipe out all badges earned (excluding account wide alignment neutral badges).
3. The freespec would only be available for 7 days or until lvl21, whichever comes first. This is a chance to alter the past, not a free ride.
OR
To make all of you nay-sayers happy, I would also be happy to do the whole morality change system through ouroboros (it would need to be a taskforce type deal that you have to complete an entire 22 mish transition villain>rogue>hero without doing anything in between) and have all opposing alignment badges wiped out upon completion. Each mission could be you going back in time and stopping yourself from doing evil or something. I dunno, it needs more thought.
Like Ive mentioned before, this isn't about entitlement or "want it nao" for me. I just want to fix my characters to what the i21 game offers new characters. Although I still think a free alignment change is justified, I think this adjustment change through ouroboros does fit the game better.
Quote:
I have not switched yet because I would rather re roll and start clean. I do have other villains already converted Im not going to delete because Im lazy (and forced the backstory on them), but you are talking to a guy that has deleted a lvl50 alpha slotted character to re roll for a powerset that fits a concept better. Concept is more important to me than the time involved.
|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
No, they haven't. Not by a long shot.
This is solely "I want NAO." The mechanisms are in place, and in all the time you've spent complaining about it, you could be up to 20 and on your way on your lowbies. And you could be the alignment you want to be LONG before I21 shows up. If there's someone you want on a side that's not "native" for that side, you have three choices: 1. Praetoria 2. Wait. Learn some patience. 3. Roll on their native side and play them ANYWAY, doing the switch - which is doable in a *fraction* of the time I21 will take to arrive - when you're able. Frankly, it smacks more of laziness. You started posting in this 7/19 - three days ago (We'll give it 2 1/2 given time zone for me.) You could have been halfway through with your alignment change - or, if it's a praetorian, out of (or nearly out of) Praetoria and on the side you want to be on. Have you done so? If not, there's exactly one person to blame. |
Quote:
This was in response to a post talking about heroes on villain-side since before Going Rogue. In general, though, I happen to believe that once you step out of the intended use of the game, you take what you can get and don't ask for more. Even from a pure customer support point of view, once you tell a CS rep you did something unsupported, most of the time he can simply tell you "I'm sorry, this isn't supported." and end it there. There really isn't any ground to make a convincing argument here, because you implicitly gave up your right to make a convincing argument about it when you chose to take the unsupported route.|
Originally Posted by Mr_Kingkillaha
Obviously some of us created characters outside of the "story" of the game, and it is our own responsibility to make our characters fit what we want them to be. I have been using the alignment system to do what I want (simply because I would rather drag a villain to heroside than have a praetorian). It does work if I close my eyes long enough. Despite some of the denial in this thread though, the rules of alignment are changing. A free alignment change is not in any way necessary for this in the same way that a free rescpec is not necessary. I think the parallels are close enough to justify the suggestion though.
|
All of that said, I have no problem with you asking for it, none at all. When I called CS about the Microsoft Language Bar crashing City of Heroes when I tried to swap keyboard layouts, they told me it was unsupported but tried to help me anyway. In much the same way, if you want to ask for an easier way, I can't stop you, nor would I want to even if I could. There's no harm in it. But this thread has sort of crossed the line between just making a request and trying to shut down those who don't agree with said request. When you go from arguing about something you want to something you feel you deserve, you cross that line.
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.
|
Well it ended up being 800 points instead of free. At least now we know that "the devs will never do that" is not a valid criticism of an idea.
Yes, I necro'd this post to gloat :P
So it's not free, and it's not usable below level 20, but you feel you ended up winning the argument?
/shrug, OK then.
Necroing is bad and against forum rules. Necroing to gloat is just poor form mate. 
The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.
I tried to find an image to reply with, but I couldn't find any epic enough to represent the epic fail of this necro.
Seriously how hard is this to understand? We don't have to like it, but that's the decision they have made. Their game, their rules.
.
You do realize that nothing in this game would ever progress if the devs weren't capable of changing their minds, right? "The devs said so" is not a valid objection to a suggestion that is in reference to a future change.
Anyway, enough semantical bs, free alignment changes would be awesome. Prove me wrong