Jade_Dragon

I would be behind this, as it would resolve the issue quite neatly. That's the problem, though, while you may not like the way the current HEATs and VEATs are unlocked, they ARE unlocked that way, and it would be unfair to introduce a new, easier way to unlock a new EAT while leaving the characters created under the original content stuck with the old method.

I find it very difficult to believe the devs will change the method they use for unlocking HEATs and VEATs, though. As much as they insist that they dislike the mechanism of unlocking EATs at 50, and as much as they say it has negatively influenced the playability of those characters, they have had plenty of opportunity to change that mechanism in the four years that EATs have been in this game, and they have not done so. Unless I see a direct quote from a redname saying, "We are adding a new mechanism to unlock EATs in Going Rogue", I'm not going to consider that likely.

It's got nothing to do with sides. First of all, the argument I am making is that Praetorians are NOT a side, and thus do not fit with unlocking either the Hero side or Villain side EATs. If that mechanism CONTINUES, then there will need to be some way to determine which EAT the Praetorians unlock. If Villains can unlock HEATs by coming over to the Hero side, then that is an entirely different issue.

Second, this is about balance. I don't care if you call Heroes, Vigilantes, Rogues, Villains, Praetorians, Praetorian Heroes and Praetorian Villains "sides", "factions", "alignments" or what, the fact is those divisions WILL exist, and they need to each have advantages and disadvantages that make them approximately equal in desirability to the others. There should be no advantage to becoming a Vigilante that makes that preferable to staying a Hero. There should be no advantage to starting in Paragon City that makes that preferable to starting in Praetoria. There may be exchanges and trade offs, for instance you can create Brutes in the Rogue Isles but can't create Scrappers, but there should be no reason NOT to be a Hero.

Giving a character started in Praetoria the ability to unlock HEATs, VEATs, and any additional EATs through a Task Force, while one started in Paragon City would have to level to 50, would be one possible reason not to be a Hero. If ANY character would to that task force, that would be more equal, although it would eliminate one reason to play BOTH a Hero and a Villain.

That's not the same thing as "Nada. Zero. Zilch." Either you can unlock something when you start in Praetoria, or you don't. (And if you never leave Praetoria, you still have the potential to leave it even after 50, to unlock an EAT, if that's what you wish. So that's not a case of "you don't unlock anything", just "you don't unlock anything YET")

If those who start in Praetoria can unlock an EAT, any EAT, then they have an EAT that they can unlock, don't they? We are talking about if they do not have an EAT to unlock.

If it's a new Epic AT, then Heroes and Villains will still have to get to 50 to unlock their EAT, but Praetorians will be able to unlock theirs at (let's say) 20. You would not have a problem with that?

If it's not a new Epic AT, but Praetorians can unlock at (let's say) 20 what takes Heroes and Villains to get to 50 to unlock, you would not have a problem with THAT?

"Be Healed!!!!!" Whack!

So if a Praetorian is unable to unlock any EAT at all, you have no problem with that?

However, you do NOT know if that it the way it WILL be done.

And if a Praetorian does not START as either a Hero or a Villain, then what does he unlock?

All right, let's take the converse. When you create a character in Praetoria, and you get to 50, you unlock an EAT. Which EAT?

You could say that it depends on if you chose Hero or Villain. If you chose Hero, you unlock the HEAT, if you choose Villain you unlock the VEAT. But what if that is not a permanent choice? What if you choose to become a Hero, but then become a Vigilante and then a Villain? What do you unlock then?

Or, you could say it depends on the AT. If you get a Blaster to 50, you unlock the HEAT, if you get a Dominator to 50, you unlock the VEAT. But what if your Blaster is a Villain? You unlock the EAT for Heroes with a Villain?

The problem is that we don't know what happens with a REGULAR Blaster from Paragon City who switches sides to Villain hits 50. Does he unlock the HEAT, or the VEAT? Do you know? I don't know. And without even that basic knowledge, I can't say that a Praetorian that gets to 50 gets to unlock an HEAT, a VEAT, or anything at all. It may be that only Heroes who stay Heroes get to unlock the HEAT. Is a Praetorian who chooses to become a Hero at 50 a "Hero who stayed a Hero"? Even if he's of one of the other side's ATs?

Would you say it is fair that a player who starts a character in Praetoria cannot unlock an EAT at all? Do you know for absolute certainty that a character that starts in Praetoria will be allowed to unlock an existing EAT?

I agree. I thought I was being clear about that, but we really don't know yet. It's possible it could work that way, or one of the "perks" of staying a Hero and never switching sides could be that you unlock Kheldians.

I'm not saying that it should be one way or another, just that the devs need to keep in mind what is equitable.

Again, specify exactly why providing another EAT that is not unlocked by getting to 50 would not cause a similar uproar.

And it was not the VILLAINS who benefitted from VEATs being unlocked by getting to 50. It was the Heroes that would have complained, if Villains could unlock their EATs earlier. The Villains would have been perfectly happy with a different mechanism. I see exactly the same thing happening it Praetorians can unlock a new EAT prior to 50.

To be concise, I am saying the following:

1) If anyone who starts in the Praetorian start areas does not unlock either the HEATs or VEATs when they get to 50 (it does not matter how, it could be based on if they choose Hero or Villain, or which side their AT originally came from) then for parity they should have an EAT to unlock at 50.

2) If Heroes or Villains who begin the side switching process can no longer unlock HEATs or VEATs when they get to 50, then for parity they should have an EAT to unlock at 50. Mind you, if they can unlock HEATs or VEATs once they complete the switch to Villain or Hero or back again, that's another issue, I'm talking about if they lose the ability to unlock EATs forever. (And note that we are talking about the possibility of side switching characters unlocking BOTH EATs, something that the devs may not wish to allow)

3) If any new EAT is introduced that can be unlocked prior to 50, then if only Praetorians can unlock that EAT, for parity, Heroes and Villains should have an EAT unlocked in the same way.

4) If any new EAT is introduced that can be unocked prior to 50, and only those who become Vigilantes or Rogues can unlock it, then for parity those who choose never to side switch should have an EAT unlocked in the same way.

Now, if new EATs are introduced that ANYONE can unlock, and Praetorians can somehow unlock the existing HEATs and VEATs, then that's fine.

I want animated hair.



Oh, and hey, a pie emote. Is there already a pie emote?

What obsession? I am merely stating possibilities. There may be no EAT at all.

Do they? You said yourself the devs chose to make the VEAT unlocked at 50 because of the parity with the HEAT. Why would that not apply to any new EAT associated with those who are NOT Heroes or Villains?

Perhaps you would prefer to take a different approach. Why don't you describe a potential means of unlocking an EAT, and then explain why it would be accepted that it does not have parity to the existing EATs?

[incoherent laughter coming from somewhere under my desk]

If this was implemented, I would make it no more than half of the stealth Super Speed gives you, or +17.5. Otherwise it would make Stealth completely redundant, as it gives you the exact same stealth. (Although you can attack out of Stealth, and it sounds like this power prevents you from attacking)

I do support giving it a -1 Threat level, though.

Well, there WILL be high level content in Praetoria, that we know. Presumably, it will not be specifically for those who start in Praetoria, though, it will be for everyone. Whether the Loyalist and Resistance factions continue to have an effect in those missions, though, is an unknown. It's probably assumed that the Heroes will side with the Resistance, while the Villains will tend toward Loyalists, although Lord Recluse has every reason to side against a duplicate of his rival Statesman.

While the Praetorians are levelling from 1-20, though, the Heroes and Villains will probably also have their missions to take them along the side switching path. And I don't see those missions ending at 20, they will probably continue right up until maximum level, although they could easily have a MINIMUM level. So there will likely be a lot of content in Praetoria. There will also be zones which could be street sweeped for XP, and maybe even branches of the AE. So I don't doubt the possiblility that you could level from 1-50 without ever leaving Praetoria, although it could be difficult, and require you to team with others. As I said, the biggest issue I see is if there is a gap between the low level and high level zones, which would make street sweeping impossible in that gap. You'd have to SK up to get over it.

Heheh. I can see that happening too. And the other way around. Heroes are going to be coming from Paragon City, likely with the understanding that "this is evil goatee Statesman world, all the heroes are villains" and ally with the Resistance. Only to find the Resistance has attracted some pretty unsavory characters too, maybe even actual Villains. A few might be taken in by the clean streets and obedient citizens and think Tyrant's ideas are right, even if his methods are a bit off. And then there will be the disgruntled Heroes who don't like Statesman and his methods any better, like Maelstrom.

The whole idea is obviously to blur the lines.

In short, we don't know if a Praetorian that leaves Praetoria is from that moment on a Hero or Villain, just as if he had started out in Outbreak or Breakout, or if a Praetorian is always a Praetorian, and is just "considered" a Hero or Villain in Primal Earth. The clarification does not actually clarify that.

In fact, Posi's two statements on the subject are mutually exclusive. In the first he says that Praetorians do not use the GR system. In the second he says that when they leave Praetoria they become Heroes or Villains, with the implication that they do use the GR system. This leads to three possible interpretations:

1) Preatorians never use the GR system. When they leave for Primal Earth they choose either the Hero or Villain side as they pass through the gate. When they return to Praetoria they get to choose again when they pass through the gate to Primal Earth again. (Note that as a Hero or Villain they cannot go to the "other side", so their only choice is to go back to Praetoria, and they can't choose to be a Hero and go to the Rogue Isles, their choice of destination likely sets their alignment) They can continue to choose sides in the Loyalist vs Resistance conflict.

2) Preatorans never use the GR system. When they leave for Primal Earth for the first time, they choose either the Hero or Villain side, and become the equivalent of either a Vigilante or a Rogue. They can travel freely between the three zones, but cannot change their chosen alignment ever again. They can continue to choose sides in the Loyalist vs Resistance conflict.

3) Praetorians do not use the GR system until they leave for Primal Earth for the first time. At this point they become either a Hero or Villain, and are placed in the proper zone for that side. They then can use the GR system to open up the zones for the other side. If they return to Praetoria, they do so as a visiting Hero or Villain. They can continue to choose sides in the Loyalist vs Resistance conflict, but this is independent of their status as a Hero/Vigilante/Villain/Rogue. If there are no missions involving the conflict after 20, this could be irrelevant.

A fourth possibility is that when you leave Praetoria you become a Hero or Villain and are locked into that choice permanently, but I consider this way less likely than either 1) or 2), as it limits you to just two zones. You might also lose your Loyalist/Resistance status when you become a Hero or Villain, but again, it is stated that that is independent of your Hero/Villain status, and so I don't consider that likely either. Possiblity 3) has a variant where instead of becoming a Hero you become the equivalent Vigilante, shortening the side switching progression, but I would just consider that a variation.

Most people seem to be assuming 3) is the case, and it does seem the most likely, but it does require assuming "do not use" means "do not use until they leave Praetoria", and "considered" means "the same as". As the language is a bit vague, I'd say that we don't know for sure.

Also, I don't believe it has ever been said by any redname that Praetorians MUST leave Praetoria. Only what happens to them when they leave. Unless the devs force us through a portal at level 20, there is no way to make us leave anyway. The only way I can think of that this could happen is if the high level Praetorian areas are not connected to the low level areas, and you have to pass through Primal Earth to get to them. Or, there is a discontinuity in the levels, such as there are levels from 1-20 and from 30-50, but no 20-30 zones. That seems like a big assumption to make based on no information.

Actually with the old Westerns it was exactly the opposite. Rather than fight with their ranged weapons, which were usually assumed to be fatal, the Cowboy/Gunslinger/Sheriff type would corner the criminals, and then beat them up in good old hand to hand.

I think it's the "terrain destruction as an indication of fighting power" thing, myself. If your hero swings a sword then that looks cool, but if he swings his sword and it emits a blinding flash of light that destroys all the buildings around him in a crash of thunder then that's REALLY cool.

Loyalst and Resistance are not ATs. Preatorians use the exact same ATs as Heroes and Villains, they just have access to all 10 of them. (But not the EATs) Also, supposedly Loyalist and Resistance will not have any impact on whether you are a Hero, Villain, Vigilante or Rogue, they will just effect your missions, and you can switch sides any time you want. So you won't go from Resistance to Hero or whatever, you will always be Resistance, unless you change to Loyalist.

I suppose there could be some EATs associated with Loyalist and Resistance. However, I doubt that will be planned into the system from the start. It's more likely the devs would develop a single third EAT to balance the Hero and Villain EATs instead of developing two more.

OTOH, HEATs and VEATs both come in two "subarchetypes", it's possible that the two subdivisions of the third EAT would be associated with Loyalist and Resistance. I can't tell you if those two would have to stick with their faction, or would be unlocked separately by getting one of their faction to 50.

As I said, I think the best way to get a glimpse of what kind of EATs we might get from GR is to see what holes it leaves in the existing method of unlocking EATs when you get to 50. If getting a Praetorian to 50 doesn't unlock anything, likely an EAT will be added for that. If you can get a Hero Blaster to 50 and it unlocks Kheldians, but a Villain or Vigilante Blaster doesn't unlock anything, then likely that will be an EAT. If getting a Blaster to 50 unlocks Kheldians whether he's a Hero, Villain, or Praetorian, and the Villain ATs similarly unlock SoA no matter what, there is the possiblity there will be no EAT, or the EAT will be unlocked in some other way than getting to 50. (Although it's certainly possible that getting an AT to 50 could unlock more than one EAT)

Well, except that encouraging people to knock foes around more often might not be in the best interest of teaming.

I don't think I'm going to worry about where the offensive boost should be at this point. I do think a +Damage is more in concept than -Res, if your power is "force" it makes sense you should be able to put more force behind your attacks, and -Res is the speciality of Sonic. But I would not be opposed to, say, having Detention Field (and Sonic Cage) radiate a -Res debuff around the imprisoned foe, (maybe a -Spd as well, as if the surrounding foes are partially restrained) in order to give its effect more usefulness to a team.

I can think of lots of other possibilities, though.

Yes, but are you more powerful than a Scrapper at the same level? (And slotted out with the same capacity IOs, if you have done that?) Not that I have a high level Kheldian, so I wouldn't know, but all ATs get remarkably easier to solo after 40.

The Kheldian may even be able to do as much damage as the Scrapper, but the Scrapper is also getting Epic Powers that enable him to attack at range and control his foes. The Scrapper may no longer be "better" than the Kheldian, but the AT's all seem to pretty much equalize and become more flexible at 50.

Exactly.

Note I put "healer" in lower case. Even Tanker is not exclusively the tank, he's just best at it.

Well, maybe it's stealing away life over time, causing foes to fling themselves away from you in fear, and bringing in darkness radiating imps that steal things' life away?

Just kidding, I certainly get the point.