Jade_Dragon

This.

One alternate possibility, if stretching it a bit, might be to allow options such as swords or maces to replace the wand. Then, if you have a Blaster Secondary that allows you to use a sword, you can make it look like the sword is shooting out the attacks. You will still have redraw between the two types of attacks (because it's not REALLY the same weapon, even if it looks like it) but it would work.

The bigger thing for me is a Blaster Secondary that allows use of a weapon, like a sword. It would probably be annoying for the redraw, and it probably should come after choices like Martial Arts, which can be blended with Archery, Assault Rifle or Dual Pistols without twice the amount of redraw. But down the road, maybe something like Archery/Short Sword might be a nice option.

Alternately, since most of those Bleach/Inuyasha/DBZ characters are primarily meleers with some energy blasts, make them a Scrapper with a Fire Ball or something from the Epic Pools. It wouldn't be fired from the sword, but then again, with customizable animations we're getting close to getting this. If you can theorize about a Blaster Primary that uses a wand or rod as the source of a weapon, you can theorize about a Scrapper Ancillary that uses a rod or blade as the source of a power blast. Then all you have to do is somehow link the weapon displayed to the weapon chosen for your Primary.

Redraw is still the big issue. The devs have mentioned a concept before they call Signature Weapons, though. If they can somehow find a way to tie redraw to some sort of common weapon instead of having the weapon separate for Primary and Secondary, this would help. And IIRC Archery and Trick Arrow are tied together since they use the same weapon. So it seems possible.

Doms also have a nice advantage since their melee and ranged attacks are in the same Power Set. So they could use a Pistol and Martial Arts, for example, and not have to redraw. That's a double edged sword though (no pun intended) as they would have to draw the Pistols when kicking to be consistent. A Blaster Secondary couldn't do that as they couldn't be sure the Primary had a weapon, or even what type it was.

Yes, but IIRC the devs made that statement before Arachnos Soldiers were introduced. They also have introduced NO additional EAT's that are unlocked in any other way. Thus, it is entirely logical to conclude that if they introduce a third EAT related to the new content, it will be unlocked by getting a character related to the new content to 50.

Certainly if the devs had introduced Arachnos Soldiers and allowed them to be unlocked prior to 50, the Kheldians would have insisted that their EAT be unlocked in the same way. The same will probably be true of any new EAT that is connected to the "neutral" choice of path. It was also fairly obvious that while getting a Hero to 50 unlocked a Kheldian, getting a Villain to 50 achieved nothing. We don't really know if there will be character types that, when they get to 50, will not unlock anything, but I would guess if there ARE, it is an indication that the devs intend to develop an EAT to fill that gap.

My thought is that if Dark Control and Dark Miasma are developed for Controllers, some of the powers should be moved from Dark Miasma into Dark Control. (such as Fearsome Stare) Controllers would then get a modified version of Dark Miasma that has some unique powers, perhaps Dark Consumption or Dark Pit.

So in essense there would be a bit more overlap than normal between Defenders, Corruptors, Controllers and Dominators. Some Defender Primary and Corruptor Secondary powers could be in the Controller/Dominator Primary, while some of the control powers from Corruptor Primary and Defender/Dominator Secondary could be in the Controller Secondary. I also see the ubiquitous Tenabrous Tentacles being a cone, as current, for Defenders and Corruptors, and a Targetted AoE for Controllers and Dominators. (in their Primary)

There could also be some replacements instead of just moving a power from the Secondary to the Primary, for instance Soul Storm could replace Petrifying Gaze, since it does no damage and thus isn't a suitable power for a Control set. Dark Servant could also be replaced by a pet that does more damage (similar to the Lich) in the Controller Primary.

Another thing to note is that Blasters supposedly would gain a great benefit from Dark Blast as they would effectively have a defense. (Reducing their foes' accuracy) They might get a modified Dark Blast or one with a different secondary effect, and this might be extended to Dominators as well. Doms could also get a different version of Dark Control more similar to Illusion, to help counter that summoning pets doesn't increase their Domination.

The ten basic ATs can be created in the Praetorian start areas, but not Kheldians and Arachnos Soldiers. Since the current EAT's can only be created in their side's start areas, likely they will only ever be createable on that side. Likely they can switch sides, though, it has not be stated explicitly, (AFAIK) but it has not be stated that they cannot, either.

It has been speculated that Praetoria will get its own EAT, mainly based on a survey that went around some time back, but it also makes sense logically. City of Villains was released without an EAT but was eventually given one, and if EAT's are associated with the two sides of Hero and Villain, then it makes sense there would be a neutral one as well.

I'm also not sure how side switching will effect the unlocking of EAT's. Will you unlock Kheldians for getting one of the Hero ATs to 50, or getting any AT to 50 as a Hero? Can you unlock both Kheldians and Arachnos with the same character, by side switching him after 50?

Well, armor as an in game effect I consider unlikely. The devs have never tied power effects to choosing a faction or side. OTOH, unlockable costume pieces I figure are probably a very good possibility.

You know, my first thought was, "Well, I guess Maelstrom is signing up with Tyrant, so that would make him a Loyalist. But we really don't know if Desdemona is going to be joining the Resistance or what. Really, her backstory seems to imply she's still an Arachnos agent, if one they're unsure about".

Then it hit me. Maelstrom, as the "fallen hero", is on the side of the "good guys" in Praetoria. And it would make perfect sense for Lord Recluse, who hates Statesman in all of his incarnations, to send Desdemona to go stir up trouble for him. So she has sided with the "villains" in Praetorian Earth - who are actually the heroes.

I can see already that Praetoria is going to start making people's heads hurt.

Well, they require SoA to respec when they reach 20, they could certainly give out a free respec to Villains that go Hero, particularly if they have a Patron Epic.

A better solution might be to have the pet go all "mercenary". His costume gets all ratty and his armor gets dented because he can't repair it any more, and he constantly complains about "I can't get Arachnos ammo any more for my guns".

I'm offended by that.

Actually, that's a big point right there. If you switch sides, how do you keep your Arachnos minion with you? By force? Mastermind henchmen I can see, you've gained their loyalty in some way (or completely control their minds) but the Patron Pets are working for Arachnos. They're probably even assigned to you by your Patron. They're probably not going to like you going over to Paragon City and being best buddies with Statesman.

It would be a lot more logical to have new sets of Epic Powers for villains that have no pet at all, allowing them to have a fifth power more similar to their hero counterparts. Meanwhile, the heroes might be able to form an alliance with a Freedom Corps Patron and gain a Longbow agent they can summon to help in a fight. That way, each player gets to decide for himself if a pet power is useless or not.

Well, I suppose a third alternative would be to lock off the Hero Epics with a Patron Arc that the Heroes will have to do, and then add another Patron Arc in Preatoria that either side can access... heheheheheheheheh... okay, I'm being evil...

Okay. I misunderstood. Being as PvP and the Cathedral of Pain have been points of contention lately, I assumed this was negative criticism. If not, then that's good, at least we've got somewhat more of an agreement.

Still, whether it's negative or positive, or neutral, my point still applies. There's no answer to, "This is a problem with the devs, and they're going to do X". If I try to argue it, you can just answer with, "I just don't like what they did with so-and-so". It's a matter of opinion, and eventually we get bogged down in what we do and don't like about the game.

So far I haven't heard anything being put off "for later", except possibly speculation that the Markets might be merged, once Villains and Rogues have a chance to bring some money into their economy. I don't think the question of how Praetorians fit into the GR side switching mechanism, and whether they will use it or will pretty much automatically have all of its advantages (except for being a Hero or Villain and getting those "perks") is being put off until later, I think it's just being left vague for the moment.

Likewise, I don't think the decision about whether Rogues will be able to get Hero Contacts and Vigilantes will get Villain Contacts is being put off until several issues in the future, it may not necessarily be finalized yet, but it should be by the time Beta comes around. The same with what Market the Praetorians access. The devs can't say, "Oh, we'll decide later, they won't access any Market for now." Obviously they will need access to a Market, but because of the concerns the devs might be somewhat tightlipped about what their planned solution is.

Sorry, I was confusing you with someone else. EvilRyu, to be precise.

That brings up a good point, though. Someone's "too fast" is someone elses "too slow". For everyone who thinks it is a disaster that it takes too long for a Villain to be able to earn the ability to do Hero missions, someone else will think it's a disaster that it takes far too little time for a Villain to earn the ability to do Hero missions.

Why should I do that? Is this the "clap for the devs" thread? Do I have to post a long drawn out treatise on every single change to the game to prove the devs are doing their jobs? This is a game, it is a different game than when it was released, it has changed and progressed, and in all that time there have been many negative and positive changes.

I don't see any reason why I should be restricted to those things that you, personally, don't like. This isn't about you, and what you like. You have certain things you like, I have things I like, other people have other things they like. Some people are unhappy about some changes, others are unhappy about other changes, still others don't care about any of those things.

In all the time the game has been out, yes, there have been changes that I thought changed the game for the better. Changes that I didn't have to wait years and years to come out. Am I going to list them? No. I shouldn't need to.

I would think the "non-patron" epics would need to be the priority, because there needs to be an option for Preatorian versions of the redside ATs. The blueside ATs can just pick up their Epics, because they don't need to do an arc to unlock them, but the redside have nothing but the Patrons. If you can't get to the Rogue Isles, you're stuck without a choice.

Didn't you say it would be a BAD thing if you could switch sides too quickly? Or did you just mean that you could switch sides quickly no matter how complicated the devs made it for you?

You're certainly welcome to come to that conclusion, and to leave the game based on it. It's your decision. However, that does not make it automatically correct that the devs never will get to those issues.

You are dismissing past performance in which issues were corrected and completed. You don't even bring them up.

I've got no problem with that. If you see a speculation, and you don't seem to like it, then you're welcome to say why you disagree with it. If it is a route the devs are considering then maybe they will reconsider it.

OTOH, I am not speculating. When you make an argument, which appears to be a continuing argument not based on any prior post, I am simply reminding you that this is speculation. The final product is likely to be different. It is certainly not likely to be the worst case scenario. (Such as Rogues being unable to take missions in Paragon City)

When BaBs was asked, "If a Rogue went through the Atlas entrance into RV, would he be vaporized by the drone?" and his answer was, "That's a good question, that I don't know the answer to."

I'm guessing either the entrances will exclude the "greys" from the other side, or will somehow flag what side they're on. Not knowing the mechanics involved, I can't really be sure which would work best.

I'll add that a similar question is whether Rogues and Vigilantes can do the special missions in Cimerora that are separated by Hero and Villain, and if so can they do both, but I'm guessing that leads into the whole question of whether those missions will be accessable by Rogues and Vigilantes anywhere. At least which gate they came in from is not likely to be an issue.

Well, a full merge of the two games would be possible, but the problem is that we do have two distinct factions. If we eliminate that, we eliminate PvP. This isn't just about crossing over content, it's also about crossing over factions. We may want the one to be free and without consequence, but not the other.

But all of that assumes that nothing WILL be done about the ideas you spoke about. Certainly everything cannot be done all at once. So concluding based on a lack of progress that the devs do not WANT to make progess is a logical error.

It is not the factual statement of events of the past that is the point of your statement, it is assumptions about the actions of the future. Outside of your comments about the Market, which I'm not going to argue, everything else you are criticising is speculation. There are no facts, as of yet, at least not about those particular arguments.

You also seem to be completely disregarding the possiblity that a Contact may give you some missions, but not others. You frame your arguments in such a way that they must be all or nothing, either a Rogue can do all missions in Paragon City, or he can do no missions in Paragon City.

This is definately a question worth answering, although it may not be one the devs have made a final decision on, like SG membership. There's a complication, though. If you assume Villains should be able to go over to the Hero side and get Hero Epics, which ones do they get? Brutes are not Tankers or Scrappers, and Dominators are not Blasters or Controllers. Certainly no hero side Epic has Sniper blasts, like Stalkers do. So either the devs are going to have to create a whole new set of Epic powers for each of the five new ATs on that side, or they will have to come up with some way for the Villain ATs to access the Patron Pools from Paragon City.

One thought I have, however, is that Praetoria may introduce a whole new set of Epic Pools for the 10 ATs, independent of what we already have. Any character would be able to access these pools, because any character will have access to Praetoria. A Hero that goes over to the Villain side may be locked out of the Patrons (because they don't match his AT) but he can use the Praetorian options.

If it were me, I would add Patrons to the hero side, and make the Epics, which you don't need to do an arc to get, the "neutral" option, adding new sets of Powers for the five villain ATs. We would still need 40-50 new Power Sets, 4-5 for each of the 10 ATs, but it would be more of a balance.

Villains wind up in the Zig all the time. Just because Longbow doesn't have jurisdiction in the Rogue Isles doesn't mean they can't arrange to have a villain lured into Paragon City and taken into custody.

We don't know that. We don't know what missions Vigilantes do or don't have access to.

There is no answer to groundless cynicism. Anyone can claim the devs are out to get them and end the argument right there.