Hydrophidian

Wrong.

Go right ahead and do this. I bet it won't play out the way you've described.

Ding ding ding!

Can I help?

I'm willing to bet most of us did. I know I did (I will rule the Spirit Thorns!). Didn't end well.

And I suspect it's why this sort of (attempted) manipulation seems to happen with greater frequency these days: More and more people deciding to play with the market, each one of them almost invariably engaging in those very same experiments--hey, I wonder if I can do this--and eventually deciding, 'Wow, this blows! There's gotta be better ways to make a profit...'

...then discovering that there are.

Okay. While you're doing that, I just made 150 million inf profit with a time investment of about 10 minutes, utilizing 5 transaction slots, on an "active toon". Took only a few hours for the posted items to sell.

But you go on ahead and wait a week for your clever scheme to come together.

There are more than two kinds of buyers.

Then they ain't much of a marketeer, as far as I'm concerned.

No one's making serious inf mucking around with salvage.

There are more than two types of sellers.

Is based on incomplete information, false assumptions and a very narrow view of what qualifies as "valid" gameplay. I don't know of any players who operate strictly in the ways you describe, and I know quite a few.

Not necessarily true and, in my experience, it's often not.

No. While it's possible, it's very unlikely, for the simple reason that it just isn't worth the trouble. I'm sure this happens here and there (and happens more often than it used to), but, I'm sorry, I don't buy that it's "most of the time". That is in no way a given. Marketeers have much, much, MUCH more profitable things they can be doing with those slots (and with less risk involved).

Again, no.

I've been keeping up with this thread and it seems to me that, ultimately, you're making the same complaint that's been made many times before: that the market isn't a store.

Well, no, it isn't a store. It's a market. That's the point. "Market PVP" was part of the design.

If you don't like it... well, hey, don't use it. It's entirely optional. Need salvage? Go run an AE arc and buy it with tickets. Want a recipe? Buy it with merits. It's possible to avoid the market entirely. I know, I've done it.

So, if your day has been ruined, you've only yourself to blame.

What compelled me to post, though, is your underlying assertion that your play preferences somehow make you a superior customer and player (it's interesting to me, by the way, how often the aforementioned complaint goes hand-in-hand with this attitude).

An MMO, to be successful, should be trying to accommodate as many preferences and playstyles as possible, don't you think? The market engages a whole lot of people who wouldn't be so engaged otherwise. So that's a good thing. Meanwhile, people who don't care for it can ignore it. Also a good thing. The market, as it stands, seems to be a positive addition to the game.

So what 'fix' do you suggest that wouldn't completely destroy a part of the game that many people enjoy? What would "put a stop to it" in such a way that would satisfy you, while still preserving the dynamics that are keeping others interested?

My guess is that you don't have one. My guess is, you've decided those players are doing it wrong and are thus undeserving of consideration.

The game was much simpler back in the day. It's evolved a lot since then, and the bar's been raised quite a bit. At the outset, I think Positron was the only TF that was truly and widely loathed.

While the uniformity of Synapse was a detraction even back then, it still offered the following novelties:

- A unique and cool-looking end map.
- An AV that was, at one time, one of the more challenging opponents you could face.
- The Babbage ambush.

As the Phalanx TFs go, I think it's weathered the passing of the years better than a couple of the others. But yah, even so, it still falls way short of today's standards.

My own priority list would be:

- Positron (done, and I love the revamp)
- Numina
- Citadel
- Synapse
- Sister Psyche
- Manticore

Keep in mind, Numina was, at one time, the highest level TF you could do. I assume the idea behind the huntfest was to say 'look how far you've come'. I used to think of it as a fun concept that was just poorly implemented.

However, since zone events have come along, that portion of the TF has gone from mildly interesting but kinda tedious logistical challenge to completely annoying stall out of the TF.

For this reason, I think Numina is probably the most in need of a revamp, at least as far as the Phalanx stuff goes. While Citadel might win on being the most boring overall, Numina's also got a healthy bit of snooze and, on top of that, shows its age much, much more (Citadel has been tweaked at least once already).

It's a lot closer than some of the other assumptions that have been made in this thread.

Here's what I myself want:

1. To be able to acquire these goodies at a pace I'm comfortable with on at least a few characters. I don't care if progress is glacial, as long as:
2. When I get these goodies, there'll still be plenty of teams tackling the content these goodies are required for. I do not want to ever be put into a position where I have to herd dozens of cats in order to experience a single event. Especially if failure to complete the event is a possibility (Oi, I get a headache just thinking about it).
3. An experience that isn't toxic. I'm very leery of any system that could empower buttheads to decide who and who does not get to participate based on whatever inane criteria they've decided is important.

I do believe the developers are trying to accommodate these issues. Whether or not they'll be successful at that remains to be seen. I think it's a dark and winding road they've decided to travel... but... if they can pull it off and successfully combine this sort of end game with the longstanding City design philosophy, well...

It'll be a kick in the junk of a certain 800 lbs. gorilla, and that'll be something to cheer indeed.

Edited to add: And, for the record, I haven't had any issues with the Alpha Slot requirements.

Yup, and I don't have a problem with that. In fact, I'd say one of the strengths of this game has always been that the aforementioned lag hasn't ever mattered. That it might now suddenly matter is part of the concern.

Look. I have friends who (try to) play the end game of the 800 lbs. gorilla over there. I've routinely been left shaking my head at the complicated song and dance they have to run through to get anything accomplished. It's a logistical nightmare. Plus, it seems they only ever have time to play their primary character, and it has to be built just so. This is the level of commitment and focus that the content in question apparently demands. Many times I have counted myself lucky that my game of choice isn't like that, and I know I'm not alone there.

So when something like the Incarnate system is announced, is it any wonder some people twitch and get jumpy?

All that said, I've seen encouraging signs that the developers are trying to introduce this end game system without significantly compromising the accommodation of casual play City has always been known for. However, I fully understand why some folks remain trepidacious about it, and it irks me to see their worries misconstrued or disdainfully dismissed.

Is anyone asking that though?

It seems to me that it's more about looking for an assurance that there hasn't been a dramatic change in philosophy.

Players: 'Does this content mean there's been a change in design philosophy?'
You: 'Nope.'
Players: 'Well, alright then.'

Edit to add:

You're certainly contributing to my current leanings.

That's not the main concern. At least not in the posts I've been reading. And it's certainly not what I've been trying to describe.

The concern is: being able to participate in this system while still being able to enjoy anything else the game has to offer. The worry is that it'll become an either/or situation, which is certainly the dynamic elsewhere.

I'm not saying that's the way it'll be. I actually think the developers are making some decisions to specifically avoid that sort of thing. All I'm saying is, I understand why people are worried, and I'm asking you to do the same.

I haven't said anything of the sort.

Fair enough, but the basic point remains: Better to attempt to alleviate concern than to pile onto it, no?

The system represents new terrain for City and it bears resemblance to the end game dynamics of Other Games That Shall Not Be Named. So... I can see why it would make people twitchy. It certainly got an eyebrow quirk from me initially, but I've since put myself on the fence about it (leaning toward positive), because of some of the design decisions that've been made.

That said, I don't think the concerns are without merit and they ought not be casually dismissed. Certainly, the people expressing them shouldn't be referred to as "whiners" or "crybabies". That doesn't really help anyone.

This is exactly the type of response I've been wanting to see. Thank you.

I'm not yet as acquainted with all the details as you are, but I've seen enough that I'm no longer dreading the rest of the system's introduction. "Is it accessible enough?" is indeed the question. I think what's on a lot of people's minds is: are the developers asking themselves that? Any indication that they are would probably lessen a lot of the worry.

Clarification: that word wasn't being used in relation to the whole game. It's describing how some people have chosen to respond to the concerns expressed about the system, and the assurances that basically boil down to "it can't happen here". Which, frankly, I'd call wishful thinking.

'Cavalier' as in: haughty, disdainful, or supercilious; offhand or unceremonious; domineering.

Not really sure what you're trying to say here, sorry.

We'll see. I think it's far too early to say one way or the other. The problem is this dynamic most certainly exists in other games, so some people are twitchy.

Yes, I'd like that!

Agreed, and that's what we've had for these many years, which is why I've remained on board.

But if splitting one's time 50/50 or 30/30/40, or any other breakdown, ends up putting a person way behind the curve on this new aspect of the game, that's a very different dynamic than anything we've had previously. If, in order to experience the new stuff as it emerges, one has to commit a significant amount of playtime into just a couple-few characters, that's introducing an either/or scenario that's very new to this game, and likely won't be well received.

I myself don't like either/or. I've happily delved into everything this game has had to offer over the years: PVP, base building, inventions, the market, MA. None of it has ever demanded a level of commitment that effectively excluded participation in other aspects of the game for an indefinite amount of time.

That the Incarnate system is showing signs of demanding that level of commitment is what has some folks nervous. Understandable, given the fact that other MMOs fervently pursue that kind of formula.

In any event, brushing off the concerns, or talking down to those who have them won't help. Instead, I'd suggest pointing out the aspects of the system that pretty clearly say: we don't intend to adopt the same methodology of other MMOs. We wish this system to be accessible, no matter how casual your approach is to it, and we are taking steps to facilitate that.

Such as, for example, the way leagues are being designed.

I think this is missing the point.

The problem is having to make a choice at all.

This system has the potential to be the first point in this game's development where, if a person wants to pursue the new content, it'll have to be at the exclusion of everything else the game has to offer.

That's not a choice we've had to make before.

If it goes down that road (that's a big 'if', mind you), that's not just offering content for a different playstyle, that's a fundamental change in the design philosophy behind the game.

Now, if there's a beginning, middle, and end to this system (which currently looks to be the case), then fine. Ultimately, it won't matter. Everyone will be able to get to the end point eventually, no matter their pace. The pressure to "keep up" will be lessened considerably.

But if the Incarnate system represents the way it's going to be from here on out... that is a different story. And I think it's safe to say that is what a lot of people are concerned about.

Yah, I'd agree, some folks are being a bit alarmist right now. On the other hand, I think others are being a tad too cavalier and dismissive about the whole thing. The truth is, it's impossible to say what sort of impact this is all going to have in the long-term, because the developers aren't telling us what their basic design strategy is for the franchise. And they ain't likely to, either. At least not in a way that isn't empty, lawyer-vetted market-speak.

So. Words of caution, yah?

To the people freaking out: This could be awesome for the game, even if you yourself aren't into it. I know you don't want this to become every other MMO. I understand. Neither do I. But... that isn't necessarily how this is going to evolve, so try not to jump to that conclusion right out of the gate. There have already been changes made to the system specifically to accommodate casual play. Thus, the developers have not, at least so far, tossed out the design philosophy that's informed the game for the past 6 years. Try to step back and give the end game a chance. The game needs to evolve to remain relevant and vital.

To the people gloating: This could be an unmitigated disaster. If you think that this game is somehow magically immune to all the negative cultural dynamics that systems like this tend to engender in a community, I think you're sadly, sadly mistaken. Furthermore, if you think that a sudden abandonment of the design strategy around which this game has built its customer base for six years won't negatively impact your game experience, I'd call that very short-sighted indeed. This system has to be successful. In order to be successful, it has to be embraced by the larger community. If it isn't, it'll be dropped, and that'll be that. No more end game for joo. So, please, I implore: dispense with the surly, insulting language. All it does is contribute to the existing distaste for the system, which, ultimately, is just shooting yourself in the foot.

Thanks for reading.

I'm glad to see other people picking up on this. This sums up what has been my fundamental issue with the Incarnate content. It represents a significant shift away from the traditional support of casual play. That worries me. A lot.

On the other hand, the game does need to evolve and expand if it's to remain successful. This upcoming content caters to a new set of interests. Nothing wrong with that. It's good to have something for everyone. It's good for the franchise.

But what I really want to know is: is this going to be the primary design philosophy going forward? Has the focus on casual play just been put on hold temporarily while this system is rolled out, or has it been pushed aside indefinitely?

A straight answer from PS on this would be nice, but I kinda doubt we'll see one. So I've taken a 'wait and see' stance for now.

Ding! (assuming they will all be usable in regular content, which I don't think is a given).

I tend to agree that this is the dynamic the developers are probably aiming for.

Sadly, 'one thing at a time' has always been the apparent development methodology around these parts. Aside from the basics, I think the only aspect of the game that's enjoyed relatively consistent attention throughout the years is character customization. And even that had some lengthy periods of neglect early on.

I'd love to see developers devoted to specific features (MA, market, bases), but maybe it's just not economically feasible to have people be that specialized.

I think the idea could be approached in different ways.

Sure, really delving into the backgrounds and interpersonal dynamics of the characters and then writing something for them would be one way to do it.

Another way would be to write the stories that occur to you, but leave room for personalized touches informed by your prospective "clients". Keep a local library of these arcs, and if someone wants to do a certain kind of story with their group, you can say, 'well, I have these arcs here that could fill that role. Interested?'

Your stories would effectively be like modules. And, with alterations, could be re-used multiple times for different groups.

After all, Architects already write for someone else somewhat as a default, because an AE arc is an interactive experience, and that always has to be kept in mind during the design process. In a way, this approach would be easier than publishing for mass consumption, because you'd know details about the players who're interacting with your story. When publishing for a general audience, all you really have is an assumption of fundamental alignment, and even that can be tricky to accommodate.

As for payment, I'd say it'd be in the doing. You'd have to be drawn to this sort of thing to begin with. Some people are, some people aren't. But my suspicion is that people who enjoy writing arcs are more likely to be the former.

.o/

I'd say Mission Architect has gone down the very road I predicted it was heading down back in September of '09 (Issue 16). It's now in the same boat with supergroup bases and PVP-oriented content: effectively abandoned.

From here on out, I don't think we'll see anything more than the occasional addition of maps and critters, and maybe the odd bug fix here and there. Certainly nothing close to the level of attention I'd say the feature really needs. Frankly, it still feels like it's in beta to me. Given how long it's been out now, that's pretty sad. However, I could say the same thing about base building, and that's been around much longer. Not a good sign for MA.


Re: Canon Changes:
I think there are ways to write canon-related arcs that can weather most possible developments. One of the tricks I'd suggest would be to look to obscure corners of the lore--things that haven't been touched since the game's inception (Hero Corp?)--and go deep rather than broad.

Another approach would be to create your own pocket of lore that's still connected to canon elements. Even if those elements end up being changed, there's a good chance it won't muck with your connection. Portal Corp is a nice vehicle for that sort of thing.

A lot of the game lore is, I think, kinda shallow. Especially the old stuff. One of the initial attractions of MA for me was the possibility of writing and playing content that brought much needed depth to the existing canon. There are many factions in the game with story potential that's never been exploited and likely never will be (Warriors immediately spring to mind), and the cultural dynamics and implications of a world full of super powers doesn't seem to get nearly as much focus and embellishment as it should.

Long and short: if you avoid the developer favorites and the big picture stuff, I think there's still a lot of room for canon-related storytelling.


A Suggestion for Die-Hard Architects:
I abandoned the public and progression-oriented aspects of MA a long time ago. When leveling, I completely ignore it, because I consider it a waste of time. I also have no plans to publish any additional arcs for mass consumption (I get the occasional twinge, but it soon passes). This is largely because I find the search UI to be beyond silly (and it just gets sillier with age).

However, that said, I've continued to use MA as a roleplaying and storytelling tool. Despite the wretched UI and cumbersome design restrictions, it's still great for that. It's like Petrifying Gaze: even though it sucks as a hold, it's still a hold, and a hold is always good to have. Similarly, even though MA is a beastly, unwieldy thing, it's still allows us to tell our own stories, and there's only so bad that can be.

I've created content for other players and I've had content created for me. Part of the strength of this is its personal focus and the impression of real change and impact. When I defeat the antagonist, for example, that's it, the antagonist is defeated. No coming back and no being defeated again in another instance by a different team. It's a singular event. There's serious roleplay mileage to be garnered from that, and it adds much to the immersive experience.

I know there are a lot of players out there who would love to utilize MA in this fashion for their characters and supergroups. The problem is, they don't have the time or the skill required to make it a feasible option. As mentioned, MA is a complicated, unruly construct, chock full of eccentricities and obscure bugs. We all know this. Going into it cold is daunting. Frustration is all but guaranteed. A lot of time is sure to be wasted just figuring out what works and what doesn't. This steep learning curve prevents many people from using (and sticking with) the feature.

However, this also means that folks who're intimately acquainted with the interface possess skills and experience that might be greatly valued by these aforementioned players.

Based on what I've been seeing around here, AE has now reached a level of disuse where even the most high-profile and visible public arcs are hardly getting any plays. Not surprisingly, Architects are feeling depressed and unmotivated. Why publish something that'll never be seen, much less experienced? Understandable, that.

But if you're one of these Architects, maybe you should ask yourself: is it really the public recognition you're craving here? Or do you just want to create stuff that gets played and enjoyed? I'm willing to bet it's the latter.

If so, maybe you should just give up banging your head against the thoroughly retarded design of AE's search UI and put your services out there as a Storyteller for SGs.

After all, you know the system, you know the tricks, you have the writing experience, and you'd have a guaranteed audience devouring whatever you created. Your published arcs could even serve as a resume', which would get you more plays on them.

It's just a rough idea. Might not work. But maybe it's worth a shot? Wouldn't it be preferable to just dumping the feature--and all that you've invested in it--entirely?

And, hey, if the practice picked up any steam, it might be enough to rekindle the attention of the developer team and get us some badly needed improvements/major fixes.

Just sayin'.

Oh, and also, I know there's a demand for event-focused AE arcs. If any of you die-hards would be interested in participating in something like that, please do send me a PM.

Thanks for reading!

Uhm, that's a misrepresentation of what's been said.

Demand has not doubled (due to secondary builds) != demand has not increased (due to secondary builds).

But thank you for now agreeing that the initial assertion was wrong?


@.o

Thank you! That sums it up nicely. I should've been that concise in the first place. >.>

Out of dozens of characters, there are only 3 I've been wanting to put a secondary build on. Still haven't gotten around to it, and Inherent Fitness has eliminated the need for it on one of 'em anyway. Aside from me, I also only know one person who really utilizes the feature and, as it turns out, it's for the same reason: a Widow/Fortunata dual build.

As for the third build, I don't intend to utilize it for the purpose the devs envisioned, and I don't know of anyone else who plans on doing that either. I approach Incarnate stuff as gravy on an already solid build that exemps just fine. I suspect that'll be how most people treat it, but I guess we'll see.

FYI: you've a rep amongst some (semi)lurkers for being patient to a fault.