EvilGeko

Sorry I missed it. Will whine over there. Just going to buy some cheese before I head over.

Thanks for the heads up.

Suppressed while in Hide or you could just turn in on in crowd. It would add a choice. Choices are good. Maybe you want to Scrap right now. Maybe you want to Stalk. Your tactical choice.

They aren't pets. It's a control power. They do no damage, just taunt. Just like in Naruto, they would distract an opponent so you could sneak up behind them and AS them or something.

Placate would be a 100% chance; this would be a proc.

The Hide and AS would be inherent power like the Kheldians get Flight/Teleport.

A small list of things I was told would never happen:

Loot;
A way to earn additional respecs;
Flashback;
MoG getting buffed;
Side-Switching;
Market-Merge.

I could go on, but I think big and argue for big.

I remember when the respec trial was first put on the test server. It was about TWICE as difficult as what went live which is about twice as difficult as it is today. I had a bad build then. I remember the struggle to keep up with those spawns of Sky raiders. I remember having to get together a well-balanced team who had to pay attention, target through the tank, and give it their all.

When we beat that really hard raid (after three attempts), it felt as epic as just about anything I've done before or since (and there's a lot of stuff after that). That I remember this from 5.5 years ago shows me how great that challenge was.

I think the devs made a mistake in lowering the difficulty of the trial too much. It's far too easy. People with bad builds need to build a better team or use their alt build to create a decent build to do the trial. It's good to have consequences for failure.

People you PvP with stand still and let you work through an attack chain? Serious question. I tend to think you make sense much of the time, but no PvP I'm aware of values sustained DPS over 1-2 shot bursts.

I harassed Ghost Falcon with all sorts of questions that he could neither confirm or deny (which means they are at least possible):

On future expansions beyond Going Rogue: "We're looking forward to Going Rogue launching in August."

On multi-group raid functionality: "No comment (he was visibly struggling not to say something out of turn. The EvilGeko was relishing the torment! )

On integrated voice chat: It's something that's been discussed. (That was sort of disappointing because he actually commented. )

http://www.massively.com/2010/04/06/...y-of-heroes-2/

They did show the new costume sets. But I could have sworn we've seen those before.

No, sorry. They weren't substantive, there were of the vein of, "This is awesome."

Like I said, these were just some notes plugged into my Blackberry. I expected someone to have posted a video by now.

no

The problem with this is that a random roll for inf would have to work out to be somewhat better than buying at the market or people wouldn't do it.

Personally, if I were to create a money sink I would:

Sell T3 inspirations (they would not be cheap)
Directly sell a small number of unique recipes. They wouldn't be the same recipes as the drops, although they might be functionally identical.

Ex. a 3% def IO that would go for 250 million influence.

True story, a friend of mine and I used to work in a job where we regularly saw the types of financial instruments that did lead to the the mess we got into in 2009. I believed then, as now, that financial and economics literacy is a necessity. Unfortunately, as my friend pointed out, even if people know better they don't always act rationally when it comes to money.

The truth of that statement has stuck with me for years.

Basically Wentworth's is an arms dealer is what you're saying. Wentworth's the corporate entity would not be shut down. If some of its managers are dirty they will be fired, indicted and sent to prison for illegal arms sales. Wentworth's the company will be fined by the government and then get back to business.

This is how it works with RL manufacturers of goods that can be used for/as weapons.

So why can't we just assume that every once in awhile, Wentworth's has to clean house? A few people go to jail, they have to sign a corporate integrity agreement, and a few years down the line, it happens again and the process repeats.

And you're assuming that just because people KNOW that some of Wentworth's goods are dirty that they can PROVE it. The devs just said that they can't. The lawyers aren't just going to stand by while you shut down a legitimate business because Sister Psyche said she read someone's thoughts.

There is no provision in the Federal Rules of Evidence for the admissibility of telepathic evidence! Or evidence obtained via X-Ray vision. And even if there were, such evidence must be obtained legally or it would be inadmissible in any event. So there!

No, it's because your opinion doesn't make sense.

It's based on fear of people who enjoy the market game without a thorough understanding of what makes the market game possible.

The larger the market, the harder it is for market players to control conditions. This isn't an "opinion" in the sense that "I like ice cream" is an opinion. It's an opinion based on study of economics. More market participants limits the ability of any one person to exercise market power in an segment of the market.

Here is a really basic explanation of what I'm talking about:

http://www.investopedia.com/universi...economics6.asp

More people participating in a market, which we get in a market merger, hurts the market players abilities. It makes it harder because they have more competition in the now combined and larger market.

I know you're going to say something along the lines of the evil marketeers will foul this logical system up, but it just doesn't work that way. Marketeers don't control this market. They never have. Market players can affect short term price disruptions, but they are VERY easy to break up assuming enough supply is created.

A market merge helps ensure that we'll have enough supply in the total market to ensure that it's harder for folks to manipulate.