CyberGlitch

No, it was because we had already learned to herd entire maps. I don't think the devs originally intended for 300 buff icons to hit the screen at once. :-)

Regardless, they fixed this well enough and put it in the release notes as a bugfix so....I think it counts as a bonafide bug.

I recall playing with Kins in the very first few months of the game that would crash the entire team every time they hit Kinetic Transfer (later Fulcrum Shift). The client couldn't handle all those buffs filling the screen.

There were literally dozens of literally game-breaking bugs like this. But the devs did get the quality-of-life bugs under control for the most part by year 2 of the game.

Actually, I think Mr. Playskool just found his new day-job on December 1 as art director for that game.

I think that somewhat depends on how long you've been playing this game. There was a time when Masterminds and Dominators, plus a slew of other AT's, didn't even exist. So I'd have to break it down a bit.

Pre-COV, my favorite AT to play was a blaster. I especially liked my Fire/Energy blaster. I never had a problem with survivability. I died, sometimes more/sometimes less, but it was part of the playstyle. Of course, "jousting" and "kiting" were totally permissible mechanics back then and once the devs saw fit to slow down that playstyle and make us all pretty much stand there like freaking archaic infantry forces on a field of battle, Blasters died to me. Without the mobility, I really was a glass cannon.

Scrappers took over for me then for a long while. Very comic-booky. No brains, just jump in and start slugging. I really liked /SR scrappers, although /Regen was so borked back then it was fun to play also. Katana/ or Broadsword/SR was just tons of fun if not a bit END hungry.

Later in the game, after COV came out, I fell in love with both Masterminds and Dominators. I REALLY wanted to love Corrupters, since they were close to the playstyle of a blaster but with debuffs, but frankly....I could build better blastery-Defenders than I could with a Corrupter. Dominators, particularly after 'fixed' were a TON of fun for me. All the controls of a watered-down controller plus direct-dealt damage. THIS was like Blasting with cheats enabled.

Masterminds were always enjoyable as well, but never quite as "uber" as almost any other AT. Fun toon for soloing, however, since you are never really alone. My namesake, my Bots/Time, was a powerhouse....best MM I ever built. iTrial softcapped to almost everything with minimal IO investment and great damage dealer too.

End to end, from Beta until Closure, would have to be my super borked Broadsword/Regen running perma-MOG. He's a shadow of his former glory but at the time...tanked Hami (without healers), got almost every badge, farmed, did it all.....without Stamina, minus IO's, etc. Now even fully Incarnated and purped out with IO's, just a shadow. Still my fave though. In his prime before all the Dev nerfs, a one man wrecking crew.

Initially, I disliked Brutes. They reminded me too much of tanks (since initially, many players on redside wanted Brutes to be tankers). The Fury mechanism really bugged me as my first few attacks just felt weak compared to my scrappers blueside. But over time, I REALLY got into the whole run-and-stomp mentality of a Brute. Keeping Fury up became an obsession, far more than scrapper lock ever did. Made all kinds of Brutes, eventually abandoning the Scrapper AT entirely in favor of Brutes of similar builds. I eventually found Scrappers a "mindless" AT to play. Brutes, which SHOULD be mindless, actually required a bit more strategy to get the most out of them which is why I think I "grew" to love them.

I REALLY wanted to like Stalkers. Had several. Didn't make any others past I13. I should have went back and tried them again after their recent fixes but I didn't. But the whole "hide and strike" mechanic just seemed very contrived to me. Loved the thematics of a Stalker...hated the mechanics of playing one.

Nobody pays for that stuff unless they don't know how to access the original sources of record. The pay "check out your blind date" services are often incorrect as they rely on tertiary (or worse) sources of data for their own databases. The original sources, particularly when kept as part of legal and/or financial transactions, are highly accurate. Again...just have to know where to look.

True, but opt-in social profile information also allows cross-indexing via darknet information sources to reveal current and past addresses, property tax assessments, insurance information, marriage/divorce, legal proceedings, past known employment, education/degrees earned/schools attended, countries lived in before current residency, family members, armed forces service for both self and family, some travel information, etc. And that's before even going into law enforcement background checks.

In other words....there's no such thing as "unverifiable facts" in today's world. You just need access to the right tools....and a little time and interest.

Look, I'm sure you are a swell guy. I doubt some of your credentials are entirely accurate but then again, we all market ourselves professionally and there's nothing wrong with pumping up our business image in the name of positive spin.

What I will say is that unless your approach was part of some overly-complex, Rube Goldberg-esque M&A scheme, I can't imagine that 1 person in a million with anything more than a high school diploma would consider that an appropriate approach to initiating contact with a major corporation for the purposes of making an investment inquiry. As pointed out by others, sending a certified letter to any of the addresses listed on their Investor Relations would have given you documentation of a credible inquiry.

And -IF- this WAS part of your Master Plan, I'd love to hear the rest of it. This could be a really great story!

Senge's Ladder of Inference model explains this well enough. We all have biases. You are no different in "adding meaning" to observable facts than I am, we just derive different meaning based on our bias.

He already posted his own name over at the "Community" COH forums.

Along with all the others....

http://www.cohtitan.com/forum/index....ic,5846.0.html

Actually, I just checked and I'm 2nd degree connected to TJ Kim through one of my board members. Like I said, if you have even modest understanding of business networking, its not that hard to get someone's attention these days via "official" channels. I do find using the support ticket approach...er....interesting though.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/richard-...son/2b/4ba/427

The last time my company bought another company, we did the crazy thing of using our personal networks to get in touch with the investors behind that other company. They were our rivals and by default didn't talk very much to us.

Support tickets as proxy for M&A bizdev efforts? I guess its not so crazy if you are some rinky-dink company with no measurable professional network to attempt a top-to-top discussion.

This was how COH started in early alpha releases....very Champions-esque "make anything you want."

And many of us made tank mages.

Unfortunately, this is almost certainly the case. I posted earlier that self-aggrandizement was a hallmark of Plan Z participants. There is an aspect of such behavior in any "world-building" team, and some of that is healthy when contrasted against the reality of a timetable. But right now it's overwhelmingly obvious that the world-builders think of themselves as real-world gods (little g) and their definitions of CoH Community are the only one that matters.

This close-mindedness wasn't in place with Cryptic but was in place with the most recent Dev team, the AE bigots and a few of the Cartel members. It's not surprising to see it becoming ingrained in Plan Z as well.

You will have enabled the re-imagined Community of your own editorial making. Nothing more or less.

"Good" is contextually relevant. If you believe, as I do, that there is a lot of wishful thinking going into deluding other players that there is hope for another game coming RSN, only to yank the carpet from under them when reality sinks in.....that's not "Good." Particularly if we are talking about some players that view this as far more than a game.

I would consider the leadership of Plan Z to be playing on people's emotions for a quick ego trip if I wanted to ascribe malice. As it stands, I only see the naive leading the gullible so.....

Pssst......your true colors are showing there sonny. Might wanna tuck them back into your spandex.


Delusion, Paranoia and self-aggrandizement about real-world "power" are signs of mental illness. I suspect more than a few of Titans board members aren't quite in touch with reality. I really hope TonyV isn't taking advantage of these players and planning on using their ideas for personal gain.

Then again, I stand by my earlier opinion. I give Plan Z almost zero chance of developing anything more than a Flash mockup.

A couple do. But most are just hobbyists with extremely simplistic views of how software games get written, and overly-inflated views of their mental midgetry in contributing to same.

In other words, don't hold your breath. The game you have been playing was one of a kind. Anything else is just going to suck. Witness the multi-million dollar flops than have been DCUO and Champions Online.

Really, all the Plan Z people are doing is getting a few people's hopes up only to slink away in shame when they realize how impossible it is for them deliver.

I totally got my moneys worth of happiness out of this game. So in my eyes, they are a bunch of over-achievers. Not all that credit goes to NCSoft, of course. Much of it goes to Cryptic directly. But still.....

Corporate policy 101 dictates that once you give someone notice you do NOT give them freedom to do what they want. Posi and crew could have just as easily coded a virus into the launcher as disgruntled employees, exposing NCSoft to huge liability.

Not saying they WOULD but they sure COULD. Not worth the risk....safer to mothball the code as-is.