Circuit_Shorter

The ability for SG leaders to create a ranking system with permissions for individuals. So I could set each officer to a different rank, if i wanted to.

The ability to change SG colors and/or symbol after creation.

EDIT: I also like the idea of a separate SG costume, and second the idea for the creator being able to demote inactive co-leaders. Thanks for looking at the SG system!

One thing I think would help teleport, on that note, is the ability to scale the distance you are teleporting in and out. This alone would make the power far more useful. I have a character with teleport + hover (to combat the lag and to be able to fight mid-air), and if I could choose to just teleport 30 yards up into the air, I frequently would. As is, I have to do a massive triangle (straight up, diagonally down, diagonally down) in order to get to the position i would like to be in for combat.

When it comes to flight, I think it's ok to have the base speed as is - flight's not supposed to be as fast as superspeed, and i can live with that - but why have the cap speed so low? I would love to be able to soar through the skies at top speed, and would arguably "waste" five enhancement slots from the ideal build just so my character could do so.

One other thought -- maybe make the speed from SS stack with fly? Maybe that's too overpowering - but I know the first thing that came to my mind when I saw a flier was "Hey, I wonder if he can speed like Superman?".

Anyway, that's my two cents on the matter.

Hehe, well, I can't say I mind the idea of the "gankers-with-anger-management-issues" group being punished by sitting in jail for, well, ever. It would serve them right. However, I doubt that this system will be necessary, because Lord Recluse has alluded to two separate systems which will both keep ganking in check and keep PvP both fair and fun.

Kudos to CuppaJo for responding to my mundane PM about a thread in the CoV board. Way to go.

Don't you worry -- if all goes according to plan (use the search tool to find the Statesman quote to back this up, it's too late for me), there will most definitely be pvp in the arenas, going live in issue 4.

My hope is to be the first person on test to try it out

Thank you all for working so hard for all of us even after release. You don't push out bad expansions as a gravy train -- you give them to us for free, and make sure that they're nigh on perfect!

Coming from a long-time MMOer, this game is awesome. I try to sell all my friends on it, something I wouldn't do if I wasn't sure they would love it. Keep up the fantastic jobs!

Pistol Scrappers

...Be careful what you wish for...

I hear CuppaJo's pretty influential

Read through the CoV board archive if you're interested in the history of the arguments over the release date =P

As of right now, on that board, the consensus is "late 2005", whatever that means.

I'd like to point out that, in a stickied post on that board, the Devs have said they "guarantee slots in beta for anyone who's been subscribed for 12 months or more". To me, I read: beta will not start till at least one year after CoH launch. Coh launch was in April. Ergo, beta cannot start till April.

And if the beta hasn't even started yet... well... it can't exactly launch.

I think our best hope is for a september-ish release. But take solace -- it's gonna be damn good.

-Weapons which we can add on to our costumes (e.g. I want my power blast to come from a cannon on my arm.)

-Weapons which persist even when their ability is not triggered (If I have a broadsword, it can be sheathed on my back or my belt, but it's not going to just pop in and out of existence.)

-The chance to take place in the first arena battle on test!

-Customizable attack animations (kind of goes along with the first one)

-The SSOCS

-Instigation of another week or two-week long, GMed event that has real consequences on the future of Paragon City

I guess that's all I can think of for now. Don't think I'm asking for too much, do you?

(I really don't care when this stuff makes it in -- but the sooner, the better.)

[ QUOTE ]
How about this then:

The target is considered "even level" relative to your attacks.

So, a level 10 attacking a level 40 would have the same chance to hit as if he was hitting a level 10, and do the damage he would normally do against a level 10 (which the 40th would laugh at, but get enough 10ths attacking him and it should eventually worry him)

Conversely the 40th attacking a 10th will still wipe the floor with him, damage wise, but if that 10th level had defence buffs (SR scrapper with bubbles - for example) then the chance to hit him would get "floored" rather than getting jacked because of level.

If I was a 10th against a 40th, 1 on 1, I expect to get pasted, but if enough of us gang up on him, I want at least a *chance* that we can pull him down, granted some of us are going to be worm food, but I expect that.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly what I was trying to say. Alternatively, NullOp, your solution is attractive as well -- If my 33rd level damage was scaled down to hit a level 14 blaster who was trying to take me out, I'd be ok with that, since it would still be a notable percentage of his hp.

And please, everyone remain calm. We'll all make it out of this ok, I promise.

o.O

Whoa... 298 words...

*keels over in surprise*

Hang on just a second! To doors, and anyone else who reacted negatively to my post, please reread it. Carefully.

NOWHERE in there did I say let the level 50's level equal the level 2. NOWHERE in there did I say the level 2 should do 500 damage to the level 50 with his power blast.

Look at what I said. The level 2 merely has no accuracy/damage penalty. He still does the same damage he would do to even con LEVEL 2 mobs. So he does 20 damage. Even at 20th level as a blaster or controller, the weakest ATs, 20 damage is next to nothing...

Please, take time to read posts before you decry them as worthless. I am against the "use the monster system" method, and that is not at all what I was proposing.

Sorry for the repetition -- while I was writing all that long crap, you said it in about a third the space and more effectively

Make level not matter in PvP

That's the old thread that was up maybe a few weeks ago. My favorite ideas on it were to either a.) make the pvp system work like the new monster system, where a lvl 40 hits a lvl 30 as if the 40 were 30 or, the best in my opinion, b.) make a level 40 hit a level 30 as if the level 30 were level 40, and a 30 hit a level 40 as if the 40 were level 30.

The difference between the two is this: (now switching to the more rhetorical, extreme situation of a lvl 50 vs. a lvl 2, in which we almost all agree that the lvl 2 should not have an equal chance of winning)

in option a.), the level 50 energy blaster shoots his energy blast at the level 2 energy blaster. the level 2 takes 20 damage, and fires his energy blast off in return, dealing 500 damage to the level 50. Because of the number of hitpoints they each have, this scales to about the same percentage of their hp (not accounting for damage enhancements, epic pool powers, or any inspirations or other random defense/offense booster.)

In example b.) the level 50 shoots his energy blast at the level 2 and probably does somewhere around 350 damage. Yes, I realize this is a one-shot, but the real point is this: The level 2 shoots his energy blast at the level 50, and has the same chance to hit as if he were attacking a mob his level (75% base), and will do damage. Real damage. not .000001, like you would now with that level difference, but say 15 energy and 8 smashing.

Now, in a level 50 vs. a level 2 battle, there is still going to be no contest. Even in a level 50 vs. 25 level 2s, there would not be much challenge due to AoEs, greater number of powers, enhancements, inspirations, etc, etc. The list goes on and on.

However, 2 level 20s now pose a significant threat to a level 25/26, whereas they would otherwise not be able to land an attack on him. So it keeps level in the equation, but doesn't prevent anybody from being able to effectively attack another player. This system would scale combats to allow massive numbers of players of disparate levels to engage in combat and for nobody to feel useless -- merely overpowered in a one on one fight.


Anyway, that's my favorite, but it doesn't have to be yours . The thread's there for the reading/resurrection, if you want.

[ QUOTE ]
No, no, no, I'm saying that Ue-B4R, Eater of Worlds is a character concept that is too evil to code. It appears that you and I agree that anybody playing this villain type would have to learn to accept the limitations of any system structure put in place: just as it is impossible in a shared gameworld for any Hero to actually truly eradicate crime, it is impossible for Ue-B4R to actually destroy the world.

However, Heroes can fight crime one villain at a time. What lesser, intermediate goals will Ue-B4R have, short of destroying the world? Destroying a country, well, we don't have any. Destroying a state or county... don't have those either. Destroying a city ... well, there's only one city, and it's shared. Destroying a city block? Damned if I know how you'd permit that in a shared world; take away the buildings and there's no place to do door missions. You're left with destroying people, or destroying things in instanced missions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I kind of like the idea of a villain bent on destruction... and while it's not possible given the current content of the game, I think it could be made possible without changing the fundamental play system. Just a general sort of brainstorm: what if you could take a mission which creates an instanced zone, with access permitted to two teams - one hero team and one villain team?

(Now I realize this possiblity depends on how pvp is implemented, and I also realize that there are many people who want no part of the griefing and bad sportsmanship seemingly inherent in MMO pvp. That said, this is just a brainstorm.)

So the villain team has goals to destroy things, such as bomb a building, or take out a power substation, or warp and rip apart a section of monorail track -- and the heroes have an opposing mission to stop them. Yes, it is guaranteed that one group will succeed and one group will fail -- but this sort of mission would be purely optional, taken from a contact who is not in your story-progression-PvE-contact series, and would just be for fun. Alternatively, these instanced missions could be indoors, through a door in a normal zone like steel canyon or atlas park... and if the villains succeed, everyone would see the windows at the top of the building blow out, or something, and the heroes would be thrown out. Or something suitably comic-book.

Just some thoughts. Oh, and to Fishwan: Excellent post. I started reading about the motivations and my jaw dropped. Great job!