EvilGeko

If it's a subscription game, I don't think that will happen. It would be fairly idiotic, unless by "bring-over" they mean they'll save the name for you or something.

Let's say you're right, and you very well may be. Other than the satisfaction of being right and making the fanbois and fangurls look silly (which is rather entertaining I'll admit), this doesn't accomplish much.

If GoRo doesn't pave the way back to glory for City of Heroes, then NCSoft will have some decisions to make. They can put the game into maintenance mode, which sucks. They can shut it down if it gets back enough, that would suck more. They can continue to support it until CoH2 is done, that would be OK, but it will probably be back to the 15 dev days (which wasn't so bad actually).

Personally, I choose not to dwell on those things. If the game fails, I've had a good run. If it returns to glory, then that's wonderful and we'll have much to look forward too. Again, it doesn't really matter either way.

I was wondering that too. I'm quite sure no one here knows the costs of running and marketing CoH. I'm similarly certain that they wouldn't tell us because such information positive or negative would be misused. And in any event, what does it matter to you if you're enjoying the game?

I think there's a corollary mistake in assuming the opposite. Most dissatisfied people don't bother to complain. They just walk away.

I would not mind that actually.

Stalkers need something. In my opinion, that's the return of the aoe left out of their sets.

Oh, I'm right in EXACTLY the way I wanted to be. I care nothing if SS is fixed. And if that's what's needed to proliferate it, let's have it.

Fixed.

Broke AT is broke.

I just use language carefully.


No?

emphasis as in original

Seemed quite decisive to me and he even emphasized the word "NEW," thus meeting two of the definitions of the term "emphatic."

Blessed be to Castle for that. But yes, you're right.

Fury is variable, not situational. No Brute is in combat and without the benefit of Fury. Prior to the changes, it was very easy to surpass average Scrapper damage. Now it's difficult to do so, but still possible.

And Brutes are ALWAYS more survivable than Scrappers. Not sometimes, always. The Max health advantage is always there.

I never said that he did say that. Just that they didn't want to merge the markets.

Maybe this one.

http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showt...52#post2741652

It's on page 9 of this post:

http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=215504

They most certainly did state, and emphatically so, that they didn't want to merge the markets.

Positron first stated that madness that they couldn't merge the markets because heroes had more inf than villains as if that were even remotely relevant to the issue.

Later he discussed mythical "issues" which came up that precluded them. I even saved a link there:

http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showt...52#post2741652

That all said, I agree with you if they ever did a merge that allowed non-unique names that they come up with something besides EvilGeko@thisnamelooksstupid.

I wholeheartedly agree.

In most circumstances it will be the case next Tuesday.

As well it should.

Correct, they don't work the same way. That's the point of having separate Archetypes with different advantages. Among melee powersets, Scrappers should do more damage than Brutes. They don't now, but the changes on beta mean that they should in most cases.

If Superstrength is too strong on Scrappers, then that means it's too strong on Brutes and too strong on Tankers. This is because the powerset is given too high a benefit relative to its fellows. The fact that Scrappers would illuminate this disparity more clearly is irrelevant.

No, that's frankly silly. Brutes are a melee AT and shares sets with Scrappers. Their role isn't buff/debuff.

Brutes have higher HP, a benefit that always works, and means that Brutes are always more survivable than Scrappers.

I would and did.

It is a small nerf. Intentionally and deservedly so.

The unique name thing is almost a red herring compared to the real benefit of an unified game. I've always been intrigued by the idea of a single shard game. I don't know how the heck they would do it here though.

I don't think the name thing would be as big a deal as figuring out what to do with folks who have 234 alts or whatever.

For my money, a cross-server TFs or ten would be just as good.

Kinetic Combat is already one of the top-tier sets for melees. Using another slot for accuracy is a small price to pay for a power's worth of Sm, Le defense.

You don't know how many times and on how many issues people have stated something to this effect just to see the devs come around to my view.

Personally, I don't care one way or another, but you folks get so up in arms, it's highly entertaining arguing with you.

EDIT: I would suggest to anyone arguing any point on the boards, do not use the devs' CURRENT view as a point in your favor. They can and do change their minds quite often. The market merger being one of the most current and spectacular recent examples.

OK, but why force the unique name. Why are you so opposed to people being able to choose conformity for themselves? Don't you think that's rather selfish. I mean you don't see me here saying you shouldn't be able to come up with a cool name and concept that no one else is using right now.

Ah but does DC comics exist in the CoX universe? One of my characters is a mutant, who grew up reading Green Lantern comics and when she started firing radiation blasts from her hands she wanted to be like her imaginary hero!

There's no content in this expansion I really care about. That's not jaded, it's just a statement of fact. I despise playing the pre-20 game and the vast majority of the new content is pre-20.

I'm going to side-switch my villains and then run tips to grind loot for my heroes while waiting to see if the devs fulfill their promise to make Issue 19 about existing players and not asking us to pay to help them chase newbies.