Lightbender

[ QUOTE ]
As for this Ghost Widow stuff, what is wrong with them making the power work how they intended it to?

[/ QUOTE ]

How are we supposed to know if a power works as "they intended it to"? Heck, we've had things change even though they worked "as intended".

[ QUOTE ]
No hold should be able to prevent you from using break frees.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree, to a point. If a hold can't "hold", that's the point? But that is way off topic.

[ QUOTE ]
But for the love of all that is holy, keep the animation! It is the biggest draw in me having over 3/4 of my current builds going GW!

[/ QUOTE ]
And if they did change the animation? What if you now found that GWs powers had a fluffy pink glow around them or something? You might have picked her powers not on the basis of the statistics on a spreadsheet but rather for the visual effects. Take away the visual effects and then what? Ignore your Patron Powers? You can't go to someone else. And that is the point.

[ QUOTE ]
That is the goal. We really like the animation since it is such a signature move. No promises, but we really don't want to change the look of the power.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure your keeping in mind that, for reasons of your own design, we can't respec out of our Patron Powers. Changing animation or even the fact Break Frees now work may have changed the Patron Pool someone would have chosen in the first place.

Changing anything on any Patron Power, even for "balance", should be an indication that you need to seriously look into a method allowing us to change Patrons after one is chosen.

[ QUOTE ]
Because IoPs were designed for base raiding and for no other purpose. Conceptually, the point of an IoP is to give attackers something to steal, and defenders something to defend. It's the 'flag' of base raids, which has to be 'captured'.

The only reason IoPs have in-game benefits is so that people will go to the trouble of earning and defending them.

[/ QUOTE ]

So they give in-game benefits that only PvPers can enjoy? Since my PvE group doesn't enjoy base raids, we can't enjoy the PvE benefits that some PvP group has? In the same PvE situation? No 1% defense for us, since we don't PvP? Even though we can gain the IoP thru a PvE mission?

This doesn't sit well with me in the slightest. This reeks of "catering to PvP", which I thought wasn't going to be happening here. The benefits should be limited to PvP if they can only be kept by players who PvP. This harkens back to the UO player who has all the l33t loot because he was the best at ganking the most people. Not happy times. Not at all.

One thing: What happens if the defending SG simply rips out their base prior to a raid? You know, liquidating everything that could be destroyed? What if they just liquidated the anchors? What if we are not on during a scheduled raid?

No, I haven't done a base raid. Nor do I want to ever do a base raid. But the CoP and IoP do sound like fun content.

I'm just thinking of how a non-PvP group could ignore the base raid all together and hand over an IoP if they really don't want to fight (or even listen to) "L33T-Boi" and Co.

I'm also wondering what the incentive is for a PvP-based group to do the PvE mission to obtain one in the first place. To obtain an item of power, your group has to either be both PvE and PvP capable, or just PvP capable. Which group sounds like they have an upperhand?

It is possible I'm missing something here. I ignored much of the IoP concept when they forced PvP on them.

[ QUOTE ]
New Design: During the 21 days you hold the Item, you are not susceptible to losing your Item of Power.

Future Design: During the 21 days you hold the Item, you are susceptible to losing your Item of Power in PvP combat.

Losing your IoP's in PvP combat is an integral part of the design and of bases (otherwise, what good are secure plots and defense items).

[/ QUOTE ]

You (as in the Powers-That-Be) are setting up for one ugly scenerio. People who have utterly no interest in PvP are now going to do this mission, get an IoP, and, well, enjoy it. Then, the switch to turn on the raids will certainly upset many people, as they suddenly find out that IoP's are "not for them". Yes, people would probably know ahead of time that this will eventually lead to base raids, but I think it's tasting the forbidden fruit that will bring the anger. Giving cool content then forcing PvP down their throats to keep it is not a good idea, IMHO.

I don't understand the "integral part" statement. How is allowing some PvP-focused group to come into our PvE-focused base, trash it and take an item that we gained in a PvE mission an "integral part" of this? Especially when the item goes away after 21 days anyhow? Now, if the IoP came from a PvP event and not a PvE event, I could possibly understand the concept (we stole it from one group, so we have characters made for PvP, so it's fine to also be raided). And if the item is kept until stolen, perhaps. But, as it currently stands, I just don't get it. Please explain "integral part".

Linking the PvE method of aquiring the IoP to a PvP base raid just doesn't make sense, except to try to get more people to do base raids. Please consider allowing this content for groups who simply don't want to be forced into PvP when they want to enjoy the content of the game. I'm sure most players would enjoy weaker IoP's or whatever if it meant we didn't need to have our PvE characters face down "L33T-Boi" and Co.

[ QUOTE ]
If it helps to date it I know we were using the term back in the early days of Ultima Online about what happened to characters between beta and live. So back before then probably. Most likly from MUDs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeppers. MUDs were a dime a dozen around 1991-1996. I mainly played Ancient Anguish (which is still around, btw), but also countless others that sprung up for a few months or a year or so and disappeared.

I'm certain I've heard the turn "nerfed" well before UO, specifically in AA. I'm also certain some of those MUDs actually had Nerf bats as weapons. They did almost no damage, but it was for the humor of attacking orcs and the such with children's toys.

So, chalk up another wrong Wikipedia entry. But it probably became more popular with UO, since UO's userbase was so much greater than any MUD's.

Although, two of my favorite weapons of all time were in MUDs: the "Toothpick of Backstabbing" and "GizmoDuck's Battlearmor". The toothpick did UNGODLY damage, yet never explained why. The battlearmor allowed you to shoot missiles at anything, anywhere. It would be akin to standing in Atlas Park and shooting a Nuke at a playing standing in some instanced mission in Sharkhead Isle.

Oh, the days of yore and all that.