Judgement_Dave

[ QUOTE ]
Did you actually read Posi's announcement?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is the forums... reading and comprehending what you are commenting on is somewhat redundant.

more on-topic: Strikes me as possible that the tokens may effectively be a player-activated strike breaker for poor recipe drops. Do 10 TFs and keep getting darn slow SIOs? Then use your x tokens and get something you really wanted instead.

OK folks looking for volunteers...

Need 40-50 people to start logging off at the construction sites in North Steel or Faultline.

Then, when they're all qualified builders/engineers we build a large garage/depot in boomtown to get our 30-40 motor mechanics logging out...

Synchronise this with 20 or 30 people logging out at bus stops and they should be qualified bus drivers/conductors by the time the first number 96 leaves the depot on it's route to Talos (with frequent stops in Steel, Atlas and Skyway - 10 INF for an adult day ticket).

[ QUOTE ]
Pain Domination? sounds spiffy! and Day Jobs? I never saw that coming does this mean Firefighter Frank can actually be a firefighter?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes - just log out in one of the fire stations...

I must have missed the bit that let's my character become an astronaut by logging out in the space station/moon zone.

All sounds good - sure the mission designer will keep many people busy when it hits and I'd guess that there'll be a few more goodies revealed nearer launch time.

Which crystal in Ouroboros is the one that allows travel to Tuesday?

[ QUOTE ]
For the OP- A mirror on his own view of gaming?

[/ QUOTE ]
You mean the anti-cobbling cream as a GA nerf?

And I note that we end with the realisation that "Bournemouth has unwitted us all"...

[ QUOTE ]
Why? You and I havent crossed swords in a long time and if we ever do I wont be the one firing the first shot.

[/ QUOTE ]
Crossed swords firing the first shot???

Are you just mixing metaphors or are you suggesting gun kata as the set to save melee characters?

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I've been on TV a few times. Neither programme was of the paint drying variety.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't believe that really was you - those police artist sketches could be practically any rotund floating male in a balaclava.

the larch

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I was the person who pointed out that unlockables based upon ratings would lead to mission-writing monopolies. I'm wary of that as it would create a 2-tier system, but I'm also wary of keeping missions private/invitation-only for similar reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I don't get the connection between those.


[/ QUOTE ]
Similar reasons, not the same reasons.

The unlockable system promotes people creating better-rated missions because they created a few initial missions that got good ratings. So, especially with 'play more from this author' type links, a few people end up creating the universally acknoeledged great missions and everyone else may as well give up as their missions will pale into insignificance without the same unlockables.

So here the playing masses lose out and end up only really seeing content from a relatively few people (the early ratings-winners).


The private-invitation-only system could easily, in my opinion, lead to most people keeping all their output as private-only. Why bother trying to create a good mission accessible to the masses when you mainly want something for you and your mates? Why risk the ridicule of the general playerbase? Though I'm still sure that the less mature would love to foist their latest magnificent octopus upon us, no matter how poor it may be. These will be the ones that really should have been proof read at the very least...

So here the masses lose out as they end up only really seeing content from a relatively few people (as most keep their works private).



Of course I may be overly pessimistic about the standard of public works if the private/public split was used. But it's worth bearing in mind that the potential mission creators are your teammates on the last PuG you were in with 2 or 3 jumped up, aggressive teenagers who couldn't spell 'hi' without a typo or 1337txtspk.

I'm expecting some decent quality missions and some real gems, but also expecting a lot of dross. And I think it highly likely that either ratings-based unlockables or the option to keep missions private would probably restrict the quality output far more than the run-of-the-mill detritus.


[ QUOTE ]
A really well crafted NWN module takes months to get right.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't play NWN and we haven't a definite idea of the CoX PPC features/process, so comparing them is somewhat difficult!

But note that my 7 days from last edit is merely an example time span, and that it is 'from last edit' - so you could take years on a mission arc if you wanted.

Pretty sure that there was an issue with taunt invention sets not working in auras - think it was something like the auras saw the character and not the enemies as the target so taunt and procs didn't work.

I've had a quick look and didn't seem to spot anything definitive about this, so does anyone know:

Is this sorted out now?

Can taunt IO sets (or other IO sets) be slotted in taunting auras and get the expected beneficial outcome?

Is my memory just tricking me and there never was a problem?


Thanks in advance,
JD
(owner of a stone tank who wants desperately to get some +recharge in his mudpots...)

[ QUOTE ]
I would suggest that the system work at two levels. When you create a mission, you can keep it private and run it with other people on an invitation basis. Most importantly, you can keep it that way.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that having the option to keep missions private would almost guarantee that most missions would be kept private. Or maybe just most good missions which are done for friends... I'm sure we'd see a more than adequate supply of poorly written dross just so that prepubescents can play at being god/a dev.

Thinking to P&P scenarios, I'd rather see missions written so that they make sense to everyone, but make more sense to your RP group if you're there to elaborate... Heck if we need a 2-tier system have it act like customising a bought scenario works, so one standard mission and a few 'tweaks' for your RP group. i.e. have a set mission with some changes conditional upon the mission creator being in the team.

I think I was the person who pointed out that unlockables based upon ratings would lead to mission-writing monopolies. I'm wary of that as it would create a 2-tier system, but I'm also wary of keeping missions private/invitation-only for similar reasons.

Of course they'll have to be some way to test missions and test them at various team sizes, so there'll probably have to be some scope for private testing... but I'd limit it by number of missions or by time to persuade people not to horde PCC missions. Maybe something like 1 arc per account in invite-only multiplayer test, or each account stays in test for 7 days from last edit unless actively published.

[ QUOTE ]
Being account based for unlocking content makes perfect sense; however. There IS that part about putting your own character in the missions as a contact. That COULD mean it's character based; unless you get to select from a list of your chars for who the contact is.

If so, I'd think the character would need to be at or above, the mission level.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'd have thought that, given everything else they'll be doing to make this work, allowing you to pick one of your charcters from a list isn't going to be a great deal (comparatively).

Besides - missions are available on all shards/servers, which sounds like the PCC server will be akin to the auction server and service US/EU. This means that your character contact will appear globally... and if they can appear globally doesn't limiting which character you can choose seem a bit of a cop-out?

Interesting... I know PCC missions are in a seperate gauntlet-test-holodeck-thingy, but presumably your character keeps the name that they have (or possibly the one you assign at mission creation time?) Guess you're fine to play missions given by 'yourself' and that name clashes aren't a problem between PCC contact NPCs and PCs.

It wouldn't surprise me if you could create a totally new mission contact instead of your own character and it's just that you can select one of your own characters as a shortcut. This makes sense as:
* The missions are claiming player designed bigbads, so some form of character design is being stored with the mission/arc.
* The PCC mission is presumably storing a clone/copy of your character if used as a contact, otherwise what happens if you delete the character? Rename? Change their looks in game? Much simpler, I'd have thought, to store a copy.

And stating that you can use your own character as a contact is a much better marketing/selling point than saying you can design bespoke contacts, so could do one that looks like your own character and has the same name.

Your point about mission level wouldn't surprise me, but then it could be totally irrelevant... IIRC the survey we saw said your character can appear as a contact, not as an combatant in the mission. What level is Paula Dempsey or Burke? Sure we know what level their missions may be, but what level are they themselves?


Final asides:
If you do put yourself ingame as the contact (and I'm sure that this will be very popular) then how the heck can any rating be anonymous???

If you come across a mission with Judgement Dave as the contact then I'd be a bit upset if you didn't think I'd done it... and rate it accordingly low!

And if you can create bespoke mission contacts or rename them, what if I create a mission with the contact name of another player? You never realised that Ghost Raptor would design such a poor mission nor that his costume looks like Laurence Llewelyn-Bowen in full gimpsuit!

Have you sugested this before? I recall someone a year or more ago suggesting this or something very similar...

Anyway, now, as then, it's a great idea and seems to fit into my ideas of how heroes would find out about crimes to foil and villains would decide where there was an opportunity waiting to be taken.

Much better than appearing as a fledgling hero/villain and everyone automatically wanting to shove work your way... even before you've made a name for yourself.

If the game shifts to multiple outcomes being possible from missions does that effectively mess up mission-sharing?

Could it even start making PuGs less attractive as PuG members all want differing outcomes?

A change in forum threads:

2008 - Can't get a team. No-one plays when I do. Merge the servers.

2009 - Can't get a team of villains who want to be evil. Can't get a team of falling heroes. Merge the servers into morality groups.

[ QUOTE ]
In the example I gave, you can let someone go, or kill them. Letting them go swings the metre to good, killing them swings it to evil. Now, if they can't resist then it's a basic moral choice and can be judged by a machine, but the guy is trying to escape, so it's not that simple. If he escapes because you aren't good enough to catch him, that doesn't make you a good guy, it makes you an incompetent bad guy.

Now, in the eyes of your superior, that may amount to the same thing and you get booted out of the bad guy club, but that isn't likely to get you voted into the good guy club either.


[/ QUOTE ]
And the worst part is I only let them go so that someone survived to tell the rogue isles who'd wiped out the others.

i.e. letting someone go isn't even necessarily goodness or incompetence.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
9. Creators don't have access to high level content (environments, NPCs, etc.) until their own characters have encountered/defeated them in the main game.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Unfortunately, that means that Heroes won't get access to any maps which are uniquely villains and vice versa.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would imagine the unlocking would be done on a per acount basis, so as long as you played both heroes and villains you would be able to unlock everything.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not reading the snippets we know so far as saying that nothing is unlocked until you've met it in-game. Just that some high level content (environments, NPCs, etc.) needs meeting in-game to unlock.

E.g. I'd see it fine that people needed to visit RWZ/Cimerora or Shadow Shards to unlock outdoor maps for these places but I wouldn't necessarily think that you'd need to play villains at all to have access to the CoV office textures.

That bit about encountered/defeated in game makes me wonder if it's just linked to the badge (and maybe souvenir) system. That could easily cover most outdoor environments and a lot of the big bads, foe factions etc.

I wonder if textures like the hellion(?) burning office or the superadine warehouse will make it in, and if they'll be available without unlocking, as not everyone encounters these but they appear very early on for heroes that do encounter them. I don't think they give badges or are in souvenir arcs either, and even if you're of the right origin you may not have done the mission.

Having it account-based makes sense - or, rather, not basing it on accounts makes no sense whatsoever. I guess an account-wide badge position could be created (if it doesn't exist already for the normal ingame badges).

[ QUOTE ]
I liked Shades of Grey

[/ QUOTE ]
So did I. Midge Ure does a great acoustic version.

[ QUOTE ]
New Spy Archetype, Power Sets & Costumes

[/ QUOTE ]
Wonder if this has been in the works since before last halloween. I'd hope a spy could utilise disguises and I know that there's been the odd disguise ingame before, but the halloween costumes may have given a bigger test/play around with the idea.

[ QUOTE ]
And given that the minority (ie the forumgoers) killed the paid expansion last time, it's probably a good idea not to speak to them about it again

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe why they've gone straight to a sample from SGs - presumably get some 'normal' players and not just the CoX obsessives who would respond to a forum-based survey.

[ QUOTE ]

As missions are played and more people positively rate them, the creator gains rewards and access to unlockable content for his/her missions. Rewards will also be given to players of the missions. Players will gain rewards such as badges and even XP for playing user created missions and StoryArcs.


[/ QUOTE ]
They may have to be careful with this and keep unlockable content to minor tweaks/touches otherwise it could effectively stop any new mission desgners from getting rewarded. i.e. if the rewards unlock super-special options that help design unique and memorable missions then the first few people to unlock and use them may make everyone elses efforts pale in comparison.

Sure, like most things CoX, they'll manage to pretty-much-balance something out...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The actual age is probably irrelevant here, but you don't really know a darn thing about the person who betrayed your trust. Sure you got an impression of them over a couple of weeks, but they may not be who you thought they were

[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly folks really need to read what has gone before as im having to repeat myself quite at the moment because folks are only responding to a response or two previous and so arent in full possession of the details they are repsonding about


[/ QUOTE ]
Before posting I had read every single post in this thread. I tend to do this with every thread I post in.

It appears from later comments in your post that you either didn't read or didn't comprehend the remark I made about rights and permissions being synonymous in IT security usage.

I'm beginning to get the real impression that emotion is blinding you on this matter. Understandable. If I'd had this happen to me because of my own ill judgement I'd be properly annoyed... though I question whether I'd keep reminding everyone on the forums how naively trusting I'd been.

As it is you're almost managing to troll your own thread that started off in a decent enough manner.

[ QUOTE ]
Thats some warped logic there my friend lol.. firstly the guy was an adult same as me and not a child.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's 20 years or so since I saw a postcard of a dog sat at a computer terminal under the words "On the internet no-one knows you're a dog..."

That still stands today.

The actual age is probably irrelevant here, but you don't really know a darn thing about the person who betrayed your trust. Sure you got an impression of them over a couple of weeks, but they may not be who you thought they were. Heck - Even though I wasn't RP'ing (in my eyes) I've had adults mistakenly believing me to be female even after a couple of weeks of regular teaming (but maybe that's more to do with empaths and the male psyche).

[ QUOTE ]

Seriously though as has been mentioned and discussed with others there is a fundamental difference between having "access" to something and "Permission" to take it.. the guy in question knew that, yet helped himself and did a runner straight after anyway. And that is after every day for a month of acting like and trying to be my friend as was already noted in the original post.


[/ QUOTE ]
BTW - half the people on the forums seem quite familiar with IT, and as such rights and permissions may be used synonymously as they tend to be used that way in IT security. SO someone saying that the person had the rights to remove everything may just mean that they had the technical access permissions to do so, with no implied judgement upon whether it was morally right or wrong.

Whether or not they had the 'right' to take the items may be subjective, but what is known is that they couldn't take anything unless you gave them permission to remove items from SG storage.

Again: You gave them permission to remove items from SG storage.

You may have done this implicitly. You may have promoted them to a level that had removal rights and didn't realise it and never intended them to have removal rights. In that case it's an unfortunate mistake on your part, but it is a mistake on your part. Maybe to help stop this, the UI needs to show you the new access permissions upon promotion and get them confirmed...

If you did know that you were granting them access permission (in a technical sense, even if bound by your gentlemans' agreement) then in-game you had granted permission for them to remove from storage without limits.

There is no in-game option for allow removal within reasonable limits. Removal permission is an all or nothing affair - and you granted permission.

So one of three things happened:
1 - You promoted the scounderel to a level which had removal rights without realising it. Your mistake.
2 - You knew you were giving them removal rights, but had a gentlemans' agreement. Your mistake of judgement - you cannot have a gentlemans' agreement when only one party is a gentleman.
3 - You knew you were giving them removal rights with no limits but didn't expect them to misbehave so suddenly. Again a mistake of judgement.

All scenarios have a mistake or error of judgement of some form on your part.

As I read it, GMs/support are there just to enforce EULA. They is nothing that they can practically do as it's nigh on impossible to prove that the EULA was broken.

About the closest you could get is that the behaviour of removal-SG exit-place you on global ignore looks like the behaviour I'd expect from someone griefing through a smash-and-grab... but it may be explained by other circumstances. He'd possibly be in trouble if he'd started sending you tells gloating at his actions and effectively confessing to griefing, but maintaining a silence isn't EULA-contravening afaik.

Best writing this off to experience, being a lot more cautious about giving information or permissions that could possibly be used/misused/abused to cause you distress and joining the call for better, more granular SG permissions and management tools.

I guess it is kinda rude that some people seem to expect those players affected by game-breaking bugs to wait 30 minutes or so whilst a full explanation/apology is delivered and those unaffected finish off their TF.

The bug was pretty-much game breaking for those affected. Support managed to give 5 minutes warning. Annoying for you but not rude under the circumstances.

[ QUOTE ]
And if something is wrong then obviously it cannot BE acceptable.

[/ QUOTE ]
Surely it's morally wrong that defence lawyers can help people who have committed RL crime avoid being found guilty?

Whilst the outcome of the guilty being found not-guilty isn't ideal, surely the system of legal representation being available to all is acceptable. The modern legal system used in the west can lead to 'wrong' results, but it is generally acceptable and most restrictions of rights based upon presumption of guilt are clearly unacceptable to many people.

I don't think anyone on this thread has argued a case for the person who took the (virtual) items appearing to be morally wrong given your version of events.

But there is probably no clear case for punishment/retribution either:
You gave the person total access to stores.
They used the total access that you had given them.
You are now upset by how they used the permissions that you gave them.

If your version of events is complete, true and unbiased then it looks clear that the other party has acted wrongly and could be seen to be in breach of the EULA... but that is only if your version is complete, true and unbiased - and that is nigh on impossible for NC GMs to ascertain.

I think that this is why customer support suggested you take it to the boards - they're probably frustrated at one of the clearest cases of this sort of breach of trust, but are practically unable to do anything without setting a dangerous precedent.

They have this right in my opinion.


On the plus side:

* Every community has it's bad apple or two - but whenever this happens you generally see a good response from the community. Don't let the one pillock put you off a game you obviously enjoyed and that still has more helpful upstanding community members than greedy ne'er-do-wells.

* It does look likely that the upcoming base-love that we should be getting will include better control of access to base storage (assumption on my part as it's one of the oft-repeated functional complaints about bases).

[ QUOTE ]
It's little more than a brute force "Haha! Your sisters dead!" taunt when boiled down.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually it's a "Haha! Your wife's dead!" taunt.

Maiden Justice was Monica Cole nee Richter - Stefan Richters (aka Lord Recluse) sister who married Marcus Cole (aka Statesman).

All covered in the Web of Arachnos.


I think I got the name's right...

[ QUOTE ]
7) What people are wearing in the street serves only as inspiration for your next character's cossie.

[/ QUOTE ]
What is this mythical street you speak of? Is it a realm of the daystar?


[ QUOTE ]
5) You try to encourage your wife/girlfriend to wear thigh high boots and patent leather outfits.

[/ QUOTE ]
Surely this isn't a sign of excessive CoX playing if the behaviour predates any MMO play?