Golden_Avariel

It's like Eva said... it's more for polish than because someone might down rate. I would say that no one would down rate for something so minor but sadly I think some people might. There isn't a lot we can do about people like that though so I'm not going to worry about it.

KD - GREAT news about the color-coding in i15. That together with smaller custom groups and being able to semi-customize standard mobs makes me excited to finally see it and how it might improve my arcs.

You might want to review this...

http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showflat....e=1&fpart=1

All I meant was that if I want to accomodate players that don't read clues right away, making sure they show up in order to make a cohesive story (assuming order matters and I think most clues should stand on their own) is something to think about.

In the past I didn't think it mattered and I'd frequently build from the back forward or as things occurred to me, or I'd delete one to create another while testing or whatever. Now I'm seeing that, assuming it matters, I should try to make sure the clued objectives are in the right reading order.

I think the point about the order of the nav text is also valid. My wife depends on the list a lot and I assume lots of others do too.

The problem of course is that it's virtually impossible to change the order after publishing. Even before publishing it means modifying a text file outside the game and hoping you don't mess it up somehow.

Did that make sense? It's more a sense of polish than a requirement. I imagine the majority of players wouldn't even notice.

That is obviously your choice and right and I wish you well.

For me and my friends the MA means we can easily sculpt our own experiences for our characters ourselves without having to depend on dev content that happens to fit us. AE made the game much *better* for us.

Different strokes and all that I guess.

I'd like to know this too but I'm afraid I don't.

Let us know if you try it and find out one way or the other.

I assume it is similar to professional sports-type of influence - basically what MrCaptain said.

However, I usually try to find arcs that fit the character and treat the AE arcs as real. When I can't then sure, we treat it as a danger-room scenario mostly done for the tickets.

Then there are some of my characters who know the dark truth and won't set foot inside of an AE building.

<-- My only cat-like girl. She has a balancing tail as part of her mutation and she wears the ears and makeup as part of her not-so-secret identity.

I've never had anyone question her about being a catgirl. In fact it has never really come up except for maybe a couple of cat nap jokes. The idea of filtering team members by their costumes seems mighty strange to me.

I'm with JadKni on this. I never rate below 3. If it is that bad I quit early and don't rate it at all. I never "auto" rate anything based on particular content. I just think that's wrong.

I realize that means bad arcs I've run might keep high scores but it also doesn't get a vote count increment from me either. Voting at all is my general "thumbs up" for an arc. To me the +1 vote is the real prize in my opinion.

Back on topic - my wife will only play 1 or 2 mission arcs and she strictly does it for the tickets. I prefer to play longer arcs with a coherent story or at least an explanation of why I'm running these missions. However, the longer the arc the shorter the missions need to be for me to actually start it.

You are absolutely correct. But when writing an arc for a broad audience you need clues if you want your arc to be more than a "map with a bunch of stuff to kill".

I like to think that a large portion* of the players prefer things to make some sort of sense and the various clue types go a long way toward doing that. Those that don't read clues won't care either way but everyone else will.

*Note I said large portion and not most or all or anything else that may be seen as trolling

Glad you said "theory" because that's all it is and yes, from patterns in one of my missions.

In a three story office the thing listed as front was in the back the thing listed as middle was in the front and the thing listed as back was in the middle... which happened to also be their order in the mission architect. I rearranged them and now they seem (on 1 try) to be showing up in a more appropriate order.

However, I have to admit that other missions do show up in the right order despite being scrambled in the architect... but those tend to be simpler missions with only a couple of objectives.

I never even thought of the nav bar thing. Important point.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would like that suggestion to be implemented for Trial accounts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought trial accounts couldn't access the MA at all?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry Keep. I just now noticed someone replied to my comment.

I believe you are correct, Trial accounts can't use the AE at all. I would prefer they be able to run at least the Dev's Choice content similar to what the OP is suggesting. Frankly, I don't know why they can't use the whole thing but just be unable to Publish. But that's just me.

If you re-read the OP with an eye toward applying it to the Trial accounts then you can see what I mean. Just throw out all the piffle that wouldn't apply to them.

I don't suppose I understand the question or how a clue would be treated differently besides the "I never read", "I always read immediately", and the "I read them eventually" types of players. But I'll give it a shot...

I don't particularly care for mob dialog as a way to convey important clues. I'm thinking they should be flavor or summarized in an appropiate real clue (end-of-mission for patrols). That's just my opinion based on seeing how lost they can become in a team environment.

It is also dawning on me that the order of your objectives as placed in the mission may have an effect on what order your clues are listed in your Clues window. That would have a big effect on clue-reader-type players, especially the ones that don't read them as they get them.

That would be unfortunate as I was led to believe that building from the back forward worked best to reserve spawn points for your important objectives. However I'm coming to believe that order not only effects clues but also the order players will *generally* encounter your objectives and is at least as important as the Placement setting if not more so.

All that has only started dawning on me in the last few days. I haven't had time to systematically test it. Maybe someone else knows for sure if I'm imagining it or not. If not then I have some mission cleanups to do... I really wish we could drag and drop objective order just like we can mission order.

Up until the last two sentences I was going to suggest a Captive/escort where it is an object instead of a person in a timed mission.

But yeah... the transformation thing would be super cool.

The vast majority of people I've talked to about how they vote are just like my wife. They think it is only natural that you would "fill in" each star until you have the number of stars you need.

This tutorial only reinforces her opinion which I think is pretty funny and she does too.

But I can tell you that when I published my first arc I had a 4 star rating (the traitor ) with 1 vote but no tickets when she used her fill-in method after playing it. That is pretty ancedotal I know, especially since I didn't know back then that I was supposed to get tickets for votes. That's why I qualify my assumption. I'm not positive what I'm saying is true but I do belive it is right.

I'm 99% positive that you can change your vote and it works fine for ratings... but you only get tickets from the first click each week.

Did anyone else notice that in the rating section of the 2nd tutorial it showed the operator clicking each star from 1 up?

I had to laugh, it was too funny. Especially when my wife blew me a rasberry and did a "I told you so" at me.

I give up. I'm never going to tell people there is a "right" way to vote again. If that means fewer tickets so be it.

Title: The Crystal Arcane
Arc ID: 213229
Creator’s Global Name: Golden_Avariel
Difficulty Level: Standard
Morality: Villainous
Synopsis: You've heard tales of a a strange crystal from another world. You've heard it can channel, focus, and store massive amounts of arcane energy. Perfect for your long-range plans. You have some information on its whereabouts, time to strike.
Number of EB/AVS: 2 EB's in separate missions
Story Type: Serious [SFMA]
Mission Count: 5
Estimated Time to Play: 1-3 hours depending on team size and stealthing abilities

Note – The contact is your henchman following your orders. The story follows the entire plan - securing travel to Paragon, chasing clues, executing the theft, and securing travel back to the Isles. All standard critters except for most of the bosses. Good for all levels.

QR

Great Idea!

That was my alternate... create an arbiter someplace. I was thinking on the drive home yesterday that the Port Oakes admin building would be a good place for him. I also think it's a great idea to move the respec arbiter out of the rain of zombies and rikti to join him.

There isn't any reason they couldn't have the longbow mission in PO since they are supposedly after evidence on the Family which are big in Oakes. Nor is there any reason you couldn't take the sub to Paragon.

Good add-on Blackavaar!

Rubberbanding and Mapserves every night since mid-to-late last week.

It is VERY annoying to the point of wanting to go do something else.

Indeed. Sorry I wasn't more clear.

Lorenz is just the 1st part of a 3-part mission from the original contact and it is that original contact you return to when it is all over. Not Lorenz.

My wife originally took Kalinda and I took Burke. When we got to level 20 we both got the cape mission but when we finished getting her cape I still had the longbow mission active. It didn't co-op the missions because mine were from Burke and hers were from Kalinda.

If those two would actually give you Lorenz as a contact instead of as a mission then you could co-op Lorenz's cape mission. I realize that when you are awarded the cape and some of the dialog would have to be changed but I think it would be worth it.

I'm not doing a very good job of explaining it. But on the hero side we sometimes get together a big group and do the cape or aura missions together with the costume missions and fun is had by all. After my experience on the villain side I realize this isn't really a viable SG activity... that really turns it into something you solo and I think that's sad.

The alternative would be to create an Arbiter someplace that actually hands out those missions instead of your initial contact.

Currently you go to your 1st contact and that's fine. But it would be really nice if the person they send you to (who is the same for both Kalinda and Burke) was the one actually giving you the missions.

That way people could team up and co-op the cape mission like they can hero-side without having to run it twice - once for each original contact.

I assume the aura mission has the same problem although I haven't gotten to that point yet.

We intended to do that when a mass of the SG got to 30th. We formed a big team then attempted to do those missions but were too busy fending off ambushes from rikti and DE.

Seeing how well that worked, we got the tailor mission done too so that we had a 3rd costume to try the new auras on.

Big enough team and all you have to do is be patient.

[ QUOTE ]
I often joke that every time I fight her I leave feeling as if I should be paying her by the hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

ROFL! Now that's a sig-worthy quote.

ok... hero - Aurora Borealis. I like her look, her powers, and her self-sacrificing story.

I don't like any of Recluse's bunch so I'm going to go with the Clockwork King too. He was the only villain I've fought that I felt sorry for in a small way. Plus... you can't go wrong with a brain in a jar for a villain

I'd love an option, whatever we call it, where you can put two different groups together, perhaps with bosses on one or both sides and definitely with animations.

That way we can do the shadow-boxing type of "wars" as well as this sort of thing.

I love the idea of a boss of one side surrounded by minions of another. That's a useful idea even if it isn't exactly the same thing.