Kitsune9tails

[ QUOTE ]
10: Fox tails god dammit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed!

Right click on a stat you want to monitor, and you should have the option to add it to the Stat Monitor, which should then appear after you put something in it.

Send a bug report.

If server transfers FROM Freedom were free, who would go?

Part of this situation is because people begged and pleaded for the ability to transfer TO Freedom, even after the Devs warned that this situation might happen.

You'd rather play on a server with unbearable lag?

To each their own, I guess.

Although you are likely correct that the system is an artifact as it stands, I beleive in the principle.

Having being in an SG be all upside with no downside actually limits player choice (effectively). There should be some upside to not being in SG mode at a given moment, even if that upside is the flipside of a downside.

I don't see any real impact either way, game-balance-wise; you get plenty of money to fund enhancements either way and creating an SG is simple and easy. It's just that my personal aesthetic prefers that there be some reason, however small, for every choice.

Otherwise, you might as well have each player automatically form an SG at level 10, and never even have the option of SG Mode: just give them a costume slot instead. There is no 'quit SG' button, just an 'accept current SG invite' button.

SG Mode should not be a total 'no brainer'. There should be some advantage to NOT being in SG mode, otherwise you are penalizing toons who don't have an SG membership above and beyond all the SG goodies they are missing out on.

It's difficult to adjust things for PvP specifically.

The game engine can tell if you are in a PvP zone, but non-arena PvP includes NPC critters, so an adjustment to your powers would affect how they worked against them as well.

The game engine can tell if your target is a player or not, so powers can be and have been designed to act differently based on your target.

However, self affecting powers can't work differently based on your PvP state (unless they are zone based). Many Defenses probebly have the same limitation.

You could remove all of the critters from PvP, I suppose, but then even fewer PvE'ers would try it out.

So you would prefer to be able to log in but not be able to play (enjoyably)? Because unless I miss my guess, that is the implied alternative.

I think the thing is that, homage or not, a character that is recognizably a modified clone of an established character MUST be genericed, or Marvel can point it out to the courts that NCSoft is violating their agreement by not protecting Marvel's IP.

So if you can tell who the character is an homage of with a glace at the costume or a scan of the bio, or if the name makes you do a double take...AND if a GM has noticed it or it has been brought to a GM's attention, it probaly MUST be genericed.

In fact, a "how close can you copy a Marvel character" contest thread would be a great way for a Marvel lawyer to squeeze some mony out of NCSoft if they let such a thing happen.

Of course, your question can't really be answered.

Once a line is defined, any number of people will walk right up to it. The REAL line is wherever the lawyers say it is, which works out to roughly:

If someone can look at the character, name, and bio and say "Oh, that's a clone of <whoever>", then they can report you. At that point, it's up to the GM sent to investigate the report. That GM has probably been told to err on the side of caution.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How long should it take to acquire Empath?

[/ QUOTE ]
That is what this discussion is about.

[ QUOTE ]
How long for farmers?

[/ QUOTE ]
This should not even be a consideration. You should not design a game based on extreme behavior. Heal/arena farms are extreme. They are not playing the game, they are setting the game up to play itself while they are away. Do we really want to encourage this?

[ QUOTE ]
How long for non-farmers?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a better question. When the developers encourage play the game improves. With a goal of 25 million for Empath, at 90,000 HP healed/day my suggestion would get the badge in 10 months (about 300 days). Given that those with aid other, that would be 2-5 times as long, but still should be doable in about 5 years, rather than the 30-60 it would take now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not particularly concerned about encouraging or discouraging farming, with regard to people who enjoy farming.

However, I am concerned about people who dislike farming but farm anyway because they feel they 'have to to get the badge'.

If something can be gotten in 5 years farming, and 25 years not farming, my hope is that only the people who truly enjoy farming will even try for it.

If the thing can be gotten in a year if you don't farm, and 2 months if you do, then MORE people will farm for it.

On the other hand, if the 'farming period' is short enough, then it won't drive people away from the game.

If it can be gotten in 5 years if you don't farm, and 1 year if you do, it won't really change the current situation, IMHO: people that are willing to farm for 5 years are willing to farm for one. I admit it would change so that people would indeed be able to get the badge in 5 years of casual/normal play, and if that's acceptable then fine.

Won't change my personal gameplay either way: I don't have the patience or inclination to farm for anything, in general.

<QR>

How long should it take to acquire Empath?

How long for farmers?
How long for non-farmers?

I would like to reiterate my idea for a "PvP package" of powers that a PvP n00b could acquire, so they can try PvP without worrying about their build.

This would be a temp power that would suppress all of the player's own powers, but grant access to a few PvP-useful powers like Super Jump, Temporary Invulnerability, Power Blast, and the like.

That way, casual or non-PvPers can try a PvP build without building one themselves.

On the subject of being refunded money for buying something that was later given away for free.

Can it be done? Sure.

Should it be done? Absolutely not. If NCSoft has to figure on the possibility of issuing 150,000 subscribers $5 each every time they give something away for free that once was a paid for deal, then they would have to not give these things away for free at all, or charge more for them upfront to cover the overhead.

There are thousands of people who bought CoV (bought mine 2 years ago), and I'm sure each of them has a different opinion on what a 'reasonable' and suspiciously convenient time frame would be for a refund window.

On the other hand, it's a free country; no harm in asking for free stuff.

All of the CoX development team left Cryptic to stay with NCSoft, save Statesman. Take that as you will.

I don't see NCSoft's acquisition of risk in taking over CoX to be indicative that they are 'apathetic' toward the game, quite the opposite.

They are indicating an intent to 'double or triple' the staff, which we as players have been calling for since before the light went green on the servers.

In any case, a move was inevitable. We should all have forseen that there was no way Microsoft would allow Cryptic to develop both MUO and the only direct competition and trust them not to share resouces or knowledge IN THE SAME BUILDING!

So a move being inevitable, I'm glad NCSoft bought CoX.

Imagine what would have happened if Marvel or Micro$oft had gotten it.

Heh, CoX has gotten this far by doing everything bass ackwards (a smooth launch, a 'lootless' MMO, character customization early and free, sidekicking) so it would not surprise me if they were the first guys to be swallowed up by another company and actually IMPROVE in the bargain.

Understood, and City of Hero didn't go over well in Korea, IIRC.

But all of the games that were developed for their respective hemispheres have been well received indeed. Lineage rules the Eastern MMO world, and CoX and GW are doing very well here in the West.

i doubt we'll suddenly have lingerie clad Dark Elves (well any moreso than already ) in CoX, just because it's NCSoft now.

[ QUOTE ]
My concern is that it'll turn into SWG all over again.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you have much to worry about here. I have been amazed at the support that CoX has gotten from NCSoft from day one: 4 years to develop, including creating the AT system late in the game in response to Alpha testing; allowing them to have free expansions before it was cool; allowing them to experiment with the first Expanshalone in existence; the list goes on.

Basically, I see the new set up as "Cryptic + Money", which everyone has been hoping and asking for for a long time.

I want to take a moment to raise a glass to Jack Emmert and Rick Dakan, and others with names unknown who are no longer associated with the City, but who conceived of it and made it a reality.

You did great work, and laid a masterful foundation upon which we continue to build. Especially you, Jack. You will always be Marcus "Statesman" Cole to me.

Good job, and thank you.

Glad to hear from you again, tpull

Thanks for the post. Will nitpick later.

Mm? Did I say Ice Armor?

EDIT: Perhaps I confused the issue by mentioning the Stone self-nerfs. But I was talking about Ice Melee.

The Devs don't seem to listen because they have different standards than the general board populace.

Ice Tankers do not underperform as a set compared to Blasters, Stalkers, and possibly Dominators.

But what about Ice Tankers compared to other Tankers?

Well, let's face it: someone is going to be (perceived as being) on the bottom. That may be Ice Tankers (it may be Fire Tankers). In any case, Ice is not intended to compare to Stone: that's why Stone has built-in self nerfs. If the Dev raise Ice up above som other set, they'll have to deal with the outcry from that set. Ergo, there's nothing wrong with being on the bottom of the Totem Pole, so long as you can still have fun there.

The point is, we are looking at: Is Ice the worst Tanker set?

And the Devs are looking at: Is Ice a good enough Tanker set?

If Ice is 'good enough' and something else isn't, the something else is going to take priority. If all of the Tanker sets are 'good enough', then Tankers as a whole will have to wait for something that isn't to be fixed first.

What is 'good enough'?

Looking at the way the game is built and the Dev Responses, it seems to be:
- Do Ice Tankers solo their own missions in the range of the 'average rate'?
- Can Ice Tankers get groups?
- With support from a team, can an Ice Tanker tank the aggro cap of enemies on average at even to +2 level?

I'd say the answer all of these is yes.

Arcanaville, this post on How To Get The Devs To Listen should be expanded into a guide and placed in Forum Guides.