Lycantropus

Oh and Gamester!! Was that just a one-shot plot device to explain the presents and such for the Holiday events or is there more to be known about that character?

I thought he/she/it was a neat idea.

Thanks so much for opening this dialogue!!!

YES!

Okay, I have more but off the top of my head...

1) Is Ace McKnight (Longbow agent in the Willy Wheeler arc) related to Ashley McKnight (villainside Midnighter contact)? If so, how?

2) In Arachnos, do the Arbiters (as a position) pre-date Recluse's rise to power? If so, do they consider themselves truly answerable to him (as their duty is to serve Arachnos itself). I mean sure they do as matter of course, but if they felt he was a threat to Arachnos itself...

3) The above question also applies to Ghost Widow. She has stated that she's bound to Arachnos, not Recluse or anyone else.

And I'll leave you with the biggest one on my mind of late...

4) The Council is often said to be from fascist roots (the Italian political group), though the 5th Column was originally charged by Hitler to come to the US (Nazi Germany roots). Of course the two were allied during the WWII so having it composed of both ideaologies wouldn't be out of place, but that said:

4a) So is the Council the 'Italian' based arm of the 5th Column basically, and was that part of the reason for the breakaway?

4b) Arachnos was originally an Italian based organization, and also played a role in the rise of Fascism in the government. Did they have any involvement with the 5th Column?

4c) Whether or not they had any overt involvement with the 5th Column, did they play a part in the seperation of the Council/5th Column? Until the breakup, it was said that the 5th were the most powerful villain organization in the world. Ironic that they fall apart shortly before Arachnos starts making a show of themselves. Did they have something to do with it, or are they just taking advantage of the breakup?

Great post Positron; made me smile

I would love to have street signs in Paragon. It would have been even more handy back when the stores were unmarked on the map.

I know those were Dev names, but that makes me wonder, do you guys have the streets named? That would be pretty cool.

[ QUOTE ]
Emotes: Flyposes will not work when the Blazing Aura or Arctic Air power is activated.

[/ QUOTE ]
This also applies to Ice Armor: Glacial Armor as well. This one has been for a while too.

[ QUOTE ]
Since this has come up so often, I guess I will leak a feature of Issue 8:

You can change your title at any of the following levels:

15, 25, 35, and 45

At 50 you can change your title at any time.

You need to visit a trainer still to change your title and they "don't stack" (in other words, if you don't use your level 35 change, you don't have two changes when you hit level 45).

There is no Influence or Infamy cost associated with this.

[/ QUOTE ]Okay.. that just... wow...

That...

It...

Wow...

That just rocks!!

I hope other features of I-8 are as cool as that... Granted the title change is a minor deal all things considered... but a very cool change nonetheless!

[ QUOTE ]
I seriously can't believe there were that many (if any) players actively helping others to "escape debt" in the manner implied in Cuppa's post - were there?

[/ QUOTE ]I doubt it. I've never encountered it. Like Lady_Sadoko said above, it's only seemed like a happy coincidence, if it happened at all.

However, if that is true, it's all the more reason to come up with an alternative to the xp-debt "risk vs. reward" equation in the PvP zones when dealing with NPC's.

The reason to go to PvP zones... primarily to PvP

The reason to hunt NPC's in PvP zones... only way to get some of the badges. It would be preferable that there be PvE zones available that these badges could be hunted for.

The only other form of PvE in those zones are the missions handed out, and the biggest "reward" for most of those are temp powers, not nescesarily the xp.

If someone is "street sweeping" for xp, that can be done in a PvE zone. The PvP zones should primarily (if not solely) be for PvP.

If what I'm saying is true and the focus of the PvP zones are ironically PvP, then the focus of our fighting is against other players which means our odds of mitigating any debt we gain just dropped through the floor, since we get no xp for them. Furthermore, with these changes, our odds of getting even more debt than before just jumped up quite a bit. Debt that we probably won't work off in the PvP zones, relegating us to bringing that back into our PvE... which we don't want to do. The fact that we die more often, faster, and with less control over the situation in PvP zones, in addition to the fact it is also "outside" debt, most players will, by its very nature, get concievably far more than debt than we would probably accrue in PvE doing "door" missions (and no, changing the debt to "door" debt in PvP zones still isn't good enough). We were promised "debt free" PvP... not "kinda debt free if you don't get attacked by NPC's in the zones, maybe" PvP.

This has been my experience at any rate, which means that when I got back to PvE to work on improving/leveling my character, I now have the setback of debt that I wouldn't have gained, and I am further dissuaded from ever wanting to PvP.

I want to see xp/debt removed entirely from the zones, but I agree there still needs to be some form of risk/reward; just not a form of it that effects PvE in the way that debt does. Either reputation and bounty could be expanded and have more depth/meaning in terms of meaningful reward they offer, or something completely different, but it seems most folks agree... whatever it is should be, should be seperate from the PvE game.

Folks were in RV during test racking up Hammi sized debt, about as quickly and easily (saw folk talking about it in broadcast every time I was on) This is not something I, nor do I think, the majority of players would find acceptable if it wasn't on test boosted to 40 artificially. I gained my fair share, and only once from the AV/Heroes wandering the zone. There's enough ways to get debt in there that they are a small consideration. The fact that made the AV/Heroes so frustrating is that they were basically "insta-debt" as opposed to any challenge (the Dev's, it seems, missed something in translation and removed debt from them, which is a good thing... but still misses a large point of the complaint in that the AV/Heroes kill you that easily that they are basically "insta debt").

I have decided to resume my boycott of the PvP zones once more, and am passing on a copy of the new patch note Cuppa posted to this list to my SG. I won't speak for the rest of my SG, but this needs to be addressed meaningfully before I step into another PvP zone, no matter how much I may like to.

Not.

Good.

Enough.

Not mad at you Cuppa (not going to shoot the messenger) but something's gotta give. Of all the things I have been ticked off about the way aspects of this game have been handled, the existence of debt in PvP zones is probably my biggest personal bone of contention. From the first promise of "debt free" PvP in the zones, you guys have yet to deliver. Some other form of "risk=reward" equation needs to be developed (and there have been tons of suggestions on what that could be) in PvP zones. The system you're discussing implementing seems even more trouble than half of those suggestions, and still doesn't address the real problem.

I don't want PvP to interfere with my PvE.. and debt does this!

So, I don't do PvP... a lot of folks don't, for just that reason. I don't think that's what you guys want.

Almost every time this has been brought up (and possibly here, I haven't bothered to read all of them because this debate just frustrates me to no end) someone says "deal with it" or somesuchrot...

I have dealt with it. I don't PvP except very rarely. Solved as far as I'm concerned. I think I'd really enjoy the free-flow PvP that exists in the zones, but I don't want debt from it creeping into my PvE game, so I generally avoid it. I don't think that makes anyone, myself included, any happier about the situation though.

It seems to me, with all the recent Hammi changes and the Arch Villain and Giant Monster Changes the customer base is becoming increasingly unhappy about the direction you guys are taking the game at large. Worse, it seems the Dev's, who created this board for feedback, largely either are ignoring that feedback or not really paying attention. This change you're now looking at implementing only serves to Illustrate this. Does what you say match the title? No.

Not.

Good.

Enough.

For those who continue to support and/or make excuses for these changes the most worthy argument I've heard is "If you show the numbers, the Dev's will listen". Well, in some cases, we don't have those numbers. This seems to be getting better, but still not where it should be if that's the primary criteria for them listening to us.

I've heard that the Dev's ignore posts that are "emotionally" based (whether or not this is true, I don't know. This has usually be said by the same players that insist on seeing our numbers for why we are unhappy). Isn't the fact that a rather a large number of players are unhappy, justifiably so (to the point where even the Dev's admit they made some things too difficult, like in the case of the AV and GM changes) reason enough?

The point is the playerbase at large seems to be growing more and more displeased with every update... every additional "challenge" added that makes tedious things like Hammi and a lot of AV fights even more tedious. Every "nerf" that needs something to be fixed (like Positron agreeing that Phase Shift needed a reduction in activation time to make it the "uh-oh" power it was "inteded" to be after the change to make it a 30 second long recharge toggle) that continues to go unattended to help rectify it. For every undocumented change (especially when they're not in our favor) that we, the player base, have to uncover... Not to mention the all the QoL issues that have gone ignored, and game effecting bugs that have been around since near the beginning...all these things, little by little, continue to erode our trust in where this game is going, and only serve to make us more unhappy...

But short of us posting here, how do you quantify "unhappy"??

We don't need to know how much damage we do vs. how fast the GM's regenerate to know that their bar stays full to be unhappy about it. We don't need to know the ammount of debt we gain vs how much xp we get in PvP zones to know that almost every time if we're actually in there to PvP and not street hunt, we'll leave with more debt than xp to know we're unhappy about it.

I play games to have fun. I play games to enjoy myself. If you can quantify that, then maybe quoting numbers is the way to go. If you can't, then listen to how your player base "feels" about a change at least as much as the numbers. Sometimes.. just sometimes... that should be enough.

I can still find a few things that are more "fun" than "frustrating" as it is now.. but that number seems to be dropping, especially as the folks I like to play with move on to greener pastures because their "fun" vs "frustration" meter gets filled.

Start listening...

Edit: Yes, I know they're changing the regen rate on the GM's and whatnot... the point is it shouldn't have made it to live like that to begin with.

[ QUOTE ]
All it is going to do is make raids more frustrating as our primary barometer on how to tell whether or not Hamidon is held--and is remaining held--has been rendered ineffectual.
If you don't want us to be able to get Hamidon Enhancements, why don't you just remove Hamidon altogether?

Better yet, why don't you create an anti-archvillain Task Force for us the way you made an anti-hero Strike Force for the villains, so we can give up this whole silly Hamidon Raiding thing. Hamidon Raids stopped being fun shortly after everyone figured out how to beat him. Now they're just work, which you keep making less and less fun in the hope of making it less and less easy.

There is nothing fun about Hamidon Raiding. Nothing. Making Hamidon attack while he's held is only going to make it even more irritating. Rather than continue to make it even more tedious, please replace it with something that could remotely be considered fun. Retire the jello blob and bring in the AVs.

[/ QUOTE ]QFT!!!

I've had a 50 long enough that I could have him full of Hammi-O's if I wanted to, but in his time of being 50, I have only been to three of them... and that was right after I turned 50. They just weren't fun for me... at all... and it seems many others. My main being a Scrapper, the only thing that's even remotely "fun" is clearing the monsters to get to it (and they give nowhere near enough xp if a poor 45+ gets debt to hope to work it off at any point in the raid itself). Outside of that, the rest is a lagfest to me, with the occasional disconnect; which is fine I suppose, because there isn't much I can do except wait for what seems like forever to run in and get my "Hammi hit" in. Now that they're only basically dual-utility SO's... they just aren't worth the hassle (though even at the old levels I doubt I would bother with the headache of dealing with all of that just to get one anyway).

I'd much prefer a TF that my SG buddies and I could do to get the same kind of reward (even better, a series of TF's so you don't just have to repeat the same one over and over again). I'm not saying get rid of Hammi... leave it for the hard-core folks that actually get some sort of enjoyment out of it (maybe make it a little more scalable perhaps to handle the drop in attendance from folks chosing to do the TF instead) but yeah.. something else would me much more preferable (as well as more kind to my computer, and my eyes).

Oh, I've noticed this new thing apply to bullet casings, leaves and other stuff..

I don't think this would be hard to create. Can't attack it, just run into it.. but I think that would be enough

Don't know if anybody else has posted about this yet, but last night I was running around with a Gravity 'troller, and noticed something way too cool.

All the items summoned up from their Propel power stuck around after they were pulled up to attack an opponent... moreover, you could push them around easily... and they bounced around off walls and whatnot.

Couldn't target and hit them with an attack, but you could bounce them around by running into them When our team first discovered this, we stopped right in the middle of a FrostFire mission for almost 15 min I think, just kicking a forklift around to each other, and we had a blast!!

Now, I realize that those items despawn eventually, but would there be a way to create one like a big red ball that stuck around in a zone like the OP suggested, indefinitely?

I could see "soccer" SG leagues devoted to the BRB.

too cool... too cool...

[ QUOTE ]
if that dom is teaming with a brute, couldnt your scrapper be teaming with a defender, with a power to break you free from a hold?

[/ QUOTE ]Yup. I don't see how that would be any different than it is now, except that with the changes I proposed, that Brute/Scrapper would still get held more often, and easier, making Dominators and Controllers more useful in PvP than they are now. In my scenario, that would just mean that they don't have to worry as much about being well-stocked with break frees.

As it is, they can already have a Defender/Corrupter on team that can break holds, with that Scrapper, Tank, or Brute already possessing a high chance of not getting held to begin with from their armors. In my proposed changes, they would still provide a noticeable benefit, and Scrappers and Brutes would still get held more often. I'm not seeing how that's relevant to my suggestion..

[ QUOTE ]
we can play the what if game all day. I say that holds should still drop toggles

[/ QUOTE ]Even if it's easier for Dom's and 'Trollers to get a lockdown like I suggest? As it is, in my opinion, I believe that's why mez resistance works so well now. It's that binary proposition of all but insta-win in PvP against the "armored" AT's (having played Scrappers and Brutes in PvP, toggle dropping is a death sentence. This is usually true in PvE too).

The difference between a toggled up Scrapper/Tank/Brute/even Stalker, is huge to one whose toggles have dropped (as I said before, short of a few more HP and maybe a mild passive or two, those AT's who have "armor" powers are just as vulnerable as any squishy if their toggles are dropped).

I'm just looking for the "happier medium" (I realize it probably wouldn't be the actual happy medium, but better than it is now) Dom's and 'Trollers should get better, and more consistent use, of their Primaries in PvP, yet not be the "easy button" either. What would you suggest?

[ QUOTE ]
pvp balance is real tough, i've given up at it

[/ QUOTE ]Then why start a debate about it, or attempt to shoot down someone who's still willing to try?

[ QUOTE ]
We do, however, both agree that BFs are a problem. What EXACTLY that problem is (and how to fix it), I don't really have any ideas on.

[/ QUOTE ]Simple. Only allow them to work/ be used after you're mezzed to break out of it, not for pre-emptive protection. It's called "break free" not "evade being held at all". Kinda draconian, but if it completely negates an AT's usefulness just by popping one, then it's too powerful as it is.

As for those with "armor" powers, I'm with you Anglican in disliking toggle drops (as I see a power activation as an "act of will" that is on as long as you "will" it to be) the best course of action, in my humble opinion, for Defense vs. Resist based sets could be likewise as simple.

Lower the ammount of "holds" required to lock them down, and adjust even more against Defense based sets. Say it takes 4 now to "lock down" any well-slotted Scrapper type (rhetorical number... not sure how many it is now off the top of my head)

Well, for Resist based characters, reduce that number to 3. Defense based characters, reduce it to 2. It may still not be exactly a match hold for hold, but that's 2 less to lock down an SR Scrapper than it is now (in this rhetorical discussion).

However, again, to compensate for the easier ability to get a "hold" on "armored" characters, and therefore allowing Controllers and Dominators more worth to their Primaries in PvP, holds don't drop toggles (Just to specify, you couldn't activate new ones while held, but already active ones stay active).

Being unable to fight back, run, or take any other action is bad enough in PvP... especially if that Dom or 'Troller has a Stalker/Brute or Blaster/Scrapper buddy respectively. Without toggles, short of a few more HP, Tanks and Scrappers are just as squishy as the next AT (which is why it's so hard to get a "lock down" on them, I imagine). Now, if those "holds" don't drop toggles, then it's possible to allow them to actually get "held" more often because they'll be able to take more of the punishment that comes from it than with no toggles on. This lack of Toggle dropping will be helpful to all the other "squishy" AT's too, as they'll be able to maintain whatever forms of aid they have for themselves or their allies (Buffs/Debuffs like from their main Powersets, or Leadership, or Fighting... etc.) helping with their overall survivability in many cases too. That'll also help shorten the gap betwen those who have mez protection, and those that don't. It may not be much comfort to the "squishies" but it's more than they have now.

Also, everyone will be more inclined to carry a few break frees, since they'll need one every time they're held... but it won't be a death sentence due to total helplessness if they do get held (for more AT's/Powersets than currently so at any rate) lessening the need and/or use for them to when it's really important/ strategically useful...

Remember the new rule they've made in that you're immune for a short period to something that's already held you. That would be the new duration point for Break Frees, as opposed to pre-emptive use. Since they've been held, they pop that break free, and the new rule makes them immune to that hold for a short while, not because of the break free, but because they were held to begin with... however, they have to be held at least once for it to work. Otherwise, that break free in your tray does nothing, and the immunity doesn't occur...

Thoughts?

[ QUOTE ]
Which..is...my...point. There SHOULD be a way around them. But there should be a BALANCED way around them, not one that specifically handles SR while making any other, non-SR player unable to defend at all. Cry "tweak", don't cry "nerf-the-world-because-I-don't-like-them-especially-this-one-guy."

[/ QUOTE ]The fault lays not with the AT's, but with the powers themselves...

As long as (most) mezzes are a binary proposition (held/not held) the AT's that have them will suffer with either near-godlike power when it works or massive ineffectiveness when it doesn't, and the AT's that have the ability to resist them must have a high chance to do so, or they're dead.

SR is only doing its job when it evades an attack. It doesn't matter what that attack is. However, removing mez resistance from them when they do get hit is yet another death sentence... why? Because when it hits, all toggles drop. Those toggles drop and they're dead. Period.

The ability to mez is a powerful thing because it renders whoever is hit by it (in almost every PvP situation, and many PvE situation) dead unless they have a team that can readily help them- after that the only other details are a matter of damage and time.

The best soloution I keep coming back to time and again, is a little "give and take" with how mez's work currently.

1) Reduce the ammount of magnitude (or whatever) that overcomes armors against mez. However, as a trade, most mezzes won't drop toggles. Power activation is an act of will, and as long as you're conscious, you can will your powers to work. This will not only help the AT's with no protection, but some toggles, it might allow the melee AT's that do have such protection the breathing room needed so they can be mezzed without it being an automatic death sentence.

2) A useful side effect if they get hit but not mezzed. Give all mezzes a slottable attribute that kicks in. Pick something appropriate to the power... -acc, -spd, -def, -resist, etc... If that steps on the Defender's toes too much, then make it a blanket - spd on immob's, and a -spd -recharge on all full holds. This means that they're still functional, but they did get hit and it slowed them down a bit. If this is done with all mez type powers then suggestion 1 may not even be nescesary.

3)Make at least one "target area" AoE immob and/or hold in every set, as opposed to a "target" AoE. If that doesn't fit the flavor of a particular set, make one an "anchor" AoE toggle power. That will allow multiple chances to mez, slow or whatever, foes as long as they're in its area, and it is active. Take Snowstorm for example. Its an "anchor" AoE toggled slow. Powers like that are almost more useful than mezzes in PvP because they work reliably. Controllers and Dominators should have something in their Primary that can be as reliable, without completely decimating the competition. Though in my opinion, a speed and/or recharge debuff is like a hold/immob that just didn't take fully... so I'm biased.

Control-type powers ultimately get the short end of the stick because when they work, they really work. The above may be a few steps toward making them a little less binary.

Hope this helps

/signed. Love the idea!

Like a few posters, I thought this was kind of silly until I started thinking about it.. Sure it's silly.. but it would be really fun!

[ QUOTE ]
TP foe - increase animation so caster cant do anything when foe appears.

[/ QUOTE ]Only if that applied to PvP. Otherwise it would destroy it for the "pulling" power it is in the PvE game, especially in solo play.

[ QUOTE ]
The issue you are describing of critters being aware of you even after you blind them is the same problem Stalkers have with Hide -- once you have Aggroed a critter, it always knows where you are, despite Stealth or Perception changes. It's how our AI has to work, currently. It is something I'd like to see changed, but it is 'difficult.'

[/ QUOTE ]Then how does Placate work? It enables a break with their lock-on right, or in any event "de-aggroes" them from the caster?

I don't know if it would be workable, but couldn't something similar be programmed; like a "placate aura", that effects NPCs targeting you just long enough to break the lock when stealth based powers kick in again? This would only be for PvE purposes, affecting only the AI, because the lock gets broken already for PvP purposes when invisibility-like (hide, stealth, invis, etc.) powers kick in.

As it stands, that's a rather severe imbalance going on, that we drop lock-on as soon as the NPC hits their power, but they can chase us to hades and back no matter how much we use to break it until they get bored of following.

It's stuff like this that embitters me with all the talk of "balancing" the game. The above example is for all intents and purposes a bug that the AI exploits to keep us targeted after we should have gone invisible to them again. I have the funny feeling that if it was a power on our part that enabled this effect for us it would be, regardless of difficulty, fixed within a patch or two at most.

I'm not trying to call shenanigans on you or anyone else _Castle_; I sincerely think you and the rest of the team are not "out to get us" or whatever, but until things from both sides of the fence start to get similar treatment, threads like these will happen.

Other examples include, but are not limited to:

Phase Shift activation time to compensate for the limited usage it now has (to make it actually workable "as intended" as an uh-oh power). If that's been fixed, my apologies. Everyone I've known that had it respeced out of it when the change hit, and hasn't looked back. I haven't met anyone with it since either...

CoT portal Behemoths that give no xp to keep them from being exploited, but can give you just as much debt as any other critter when they dogpile you..

If the system or AI needs some sort of nerf, that should be at least near as important as when we do. I'm sorry, but it just doesn't seem like that a lot of the time from our side of things.

I'd say leave the Night Widows as they are, but we need to work at least as well with our versions of the power against the NPC's as they do with us, or against other players.

edited a sentence for clarity

[ QUOTE ]
I think part of the reason the T-shirt is problematic is that many companies like Cafe Press that do those services are set up with the implication of merchandise. IIRC, even if you don't intend to sell multiple copies of a T-shirt, that is what their business is set up to do, and thus the legal problems with ownerships *really* start coming in.

[/ QUOTE ]In addition to that, check their contract. I'm willing to bet they have a very similar agreement with your useage of their service, and terms of "ownership" of such "content" as CoX's EULA- for the same reason CoX does, to protect your rights, and theirs.

Welcome to the forums! We're a raucous bunch at times, but overall we try to be nice... I think...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Another twist. I'm a novelist. I'm a writer. I write novels for a living.
What if I want to write a novel of my character, or are in the middle of writing a novel and decide to remake a char in CoH/V?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't do it.

Basically, Cryptic/NCsoft owns all characters/names/images that appear in CoH/CoV.

If you were a special case (say you were Warren Ellis, and you wanted to make Spider Jerusalem in the game, and you contacted Cryptic, and they gave you the nod), it might work out (and there would probably be lawyers or at least some serious paperwork involved). But those instances are nebulous and so few and far between, it's not worth risking.

Keep your CoH/CoV characters seperate from those you plan to sell, and you should be fine.

cheers,
Arctic Sun

[/ QUOTE ]Would keeping them seperate include deleting one that was existant in CoX prior to copyrighting/trademarking?

As I said above, the implication of the EULA is with "content". If we remove that "content" by deleting that character, would that not remove any liablity from either side? So long as they observed the seperation of the games specific content and images (Hero/Villain groups, city/world history, zones, specific power names, etc.) from your end, and accepted that all of that character's images previously existant from when that character was on the servers would still be considered your "content," would you guys press the issue and try to claim ownership over whatever became of it after it was deleted off your servers?

I can agree that everything up to that point is considered "content" within CoX, and subject to the EULA, but after it is removed by the user?

[ QUOTE ]
Incorrect. The ruling wasn't that the copyright violations didn't exist, they won because they aren't liable for copyright violations made by their users. They demonstrated that they make every attempt to prevent copyright violations in-game.

[/ QUOTE ]Quite correct. Using their "content" to violate copyrighted/trademarked material is right out. This too, is part of that section of the EULA.

Actually the way I always read it, the intent was for it to be mutually beneficial.

I am not a lawyer either (though I have taken pre-law classes.. that and about 2 bucks'll buy me a cup of coffee) but a lot of other venues utilize a similar agreement.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but basically the way it ideally plays out it's to protect both them, and us, from copyright infringement.

Say, Bob work for some other game/comic company, and good ol' Bob run across the Electro Kid from your example. He likes it and then takes it and uses it in Bob's project. Cryptic has the rights that you gave them in the EULA to pursue a lawsuit against such material because there is precident of its existance prior to Bob's useage of it. In this way, your creations are protected.

Likewise, should they decide to take screenshots to show investors, or create a demo to show at an expo of your characters in action (like a big montage of something in Atlas Park, for example) then they have the right to use your creation and likeness to do that as well. It would be near impossible to locate every single person that was hanging out in Atlas that day to find and get their permission to use their character in a demo of some kind.. In that respect, it protects them.

Now the limits of the EULA haven't really been tested, because Cryptic nor NCSoft have pursued anything in that regard, which they reserve the right to. Fan art and commisioned work has been displayed and advertized on these very forums. Their "approval" of such usage is displayed by allowing such posts to exist, and a lack of litigation on their part. Doing so would harm both parties; as their rights would be brought into question, costing them tons of money for the lawsuit and for whatever changes may need to be made to the EULA contract as a product of that (and believe me, that's it's own mess that I'm sure they want to avoid)- and the fanbase, which would be seen as a betrayal of trust due to the "spirit" of the genre. As someone said, fan art and such is a part of the culture... they would cross that at their own risk.

The only real problems that may occur as a by-product of the EULA is if someone uses "content" to make a profit. Now here is where it gets a little fuzzy. Content is the key word here.

On one hand, you have their content. Anything that's specifically "theirs" (areas of the city, villain groups, game specific terms like "he's a Blaster" intimating their AT system,etc) do belong specifically to them. Using such is an open and shut case. If someone used someone else's character background or concept without that individual's permission.. again, open and shut.

Using your own material, and I mean only that which is yours, not incorporating any aspect of the CoH universe as stated above (including any AT specific terms or even the names of the attacks used in game) I doubt they would seek legal action. Again, it is your own work. It would likely be too much of a hassle to pursue, and too difficult to claim in court. Plus, again, it goes against what I think the "spirit" of the EULA was designed to protect. Of course, I could be overly optimistic. I just honestly don't think they created this game to steal our ideas for their own use at our expense.

If, like in a previous example, someone had sole legal rights to a character in trademark and copyright and reproduced that character in CoX, so long as they didn't pursue a lawsuit against Cryptic for actually allowing them to make that character, or if NCSoft used that character (image, info, name etc.) that is existant in the game in whatever manner they wished, then I doubt they'd press the issue. However, that is, again, part of the "spirit" of the deal, as it were.

The really fuzzy part comes with the actual image of the character. Since each costume piece is considered copyrighted art (and it rightly should be, as their graphic artists designed each piece) using that costume whole, or in part, could be considered grounds for suit. However, much of it is "common" imagery. A glove is a glove is a glove, right? So long as care is taken to alter the costume in a way that makes it different from what can be created with the system, changing logos and patterns (like the chest designs, or the cape and costume patterns) utilizing more colors in a design than the costume creator itself allows (3 colors on a cape, for instance, where the creator only allows for 2) and through other such methods seperate it from the source material to make it something unique, then it becomes your own work.

On that note actually, there's also room for "derivative" works as well, which is what basically was at the core of the Marvel case, and why it didn't go through.

Something inspired by something else is also okay, so long as there is enough difference in the derivation to say that it was not copied from that source, but inspired by it. CoX was inspired by the super hero genre and the comic culture surrounding it. These elements exist within the realm of Marvel Comics (and of course others) but the CoX universe is a unique entity, with its own history and culture, heroes and villains- all of which was inspired by its predecessors in this derivative work that is CoX, but identifiably unique in and of itself.

I personally would suggest if someone decided to make a "for profit" venture utilizing a character of their own creation currently existant in CoX, and the above guidelines are observed, that it would also probably be appropriate to delete the character. That should remove any claim they might have, as it would no longer be "content" within their realm. All previous images or whatever they may have gathered about that particular character would still be "theirs" as it existed as "content" within their game, so if they show a picture of that character that you have since deleted and copyrighted/trademarked etc. they still have your permission from when you agreed to the EULA and made the character. Again, both their, and your, rights are protected.

That's how I understood it to mean anyway... for what it's worth

Well thought out, well said, I agree with you whole heartedly!

Except for the debt part.

Like I said before, take out the debt and whatever petty smarmy gank fantasies anyone has won't bother me in the slightest. Bring it on, I say, it only works up my appetite, and my prey's fall that much sweeter!

If the Dev's would just remove the debt. 'Til then, I won't be seen in there. Sorry. Take xp too to counter the no debt, I could care less... If I go into PvP zones it's for the fun of PvP, not xp, and defintely not debt.

[ QUOTE ]
Uh oh, more reasons to ignore pvp zones....

[/ QUOTE ]
Pretty much

Please, put down the bravado and actually join the conversation, we're not in the PvP zone at the moment.

I don't disagree that it's kill or be killed... I don't have anything to do with the FC's or any of that (though I think the idea is novel, and should be acknowledged by the Dev's in some way... after all, it seems a rather large portion of the player base wants it) The few times I've gone into the PvP zones, it was for the purpose of choosing and hunting prey, not do a FC kind of thing... (who would think... a werewolf doing that??)

But FC's and all that aside, the problem is PvP debt. TPing foes is not the only way it happens... The few times I've PvP'd I've gotten debt... not once from TP foe. Usually I happened to be fighting a mob and a Stalker would come up behind me and do enough damage not to kill me, but the next NPC hit did it (which will almost be a constant frustration for Stalkers who want bounty points, and their prey who get debt, when they bring in the "no one shot kill" rule- but will be a vast source of glee to those that want to "grief" and cause debt)... or in the din of battle with a worthy meal (sorry.. opponent)... NPC's all around fighting us and each other, and an NPC just happens to get a lucky hit at the right moment.

I love that kind of atmosphere though... throngs of warriors all over the field, and the hero sees the villain (or the other way around)... wades through the masses of NPC's to handle their true adversary personally... Kill or be killed I say!

But that's not the issue... it's debt or no debt. It isn't the "rules of engangement" I have a problem with, it's the game mechanic. I actively avoid debt in PvE, and I don't want debt in PvP, accidental or not, period. That's what they Dev's said way back when, and was a big selling point to me.

The fact that the Dev's all but handed the green light to every petty piece of garbage griefer out there to see if they can make an opponent hit the debt cap and leave the zone out of frustration while screaming PWNED U!!! at their backs on the way out... well... That's what I have issue with.

If they removed the debt, I would say gank, TP foe, Hurricane- whatever other dirty trick you can devise- all who stand in your way... more power to you, whatever floats your boat... but the debt's gotta go!

And for those of you who are asking those who aren't on Champion server to stop posting, my namesake and my highest, is on Champion, and is my main server

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do NOT and I repeat do NOT, call yourself a puller...run out in the open, fire off your blast AND STAND THERE. Cut a damn corner, get out of line of sight. Especially if your fighting ranged enemies. It baffles me how some people dont understand this logic.
Then complain when they're kissing the floortiles, 'why didn't you guys help me?'
I never boot noobs for being noobs, but man they can try your patience.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah. Love when I pull, go to back up and run around the corner and am able to backpedal 2" before slamming into the team. "Uh guys... MOVE!" followed by ::trampled::

[/ QUOTE ]Or just as bad:
You go through the time and effort to expain what you're about to do, set up a corner with Ice Slick, Caltrops, Tar Patch... whatever; then take a beautiful shot, and go around the corner waiting for the enemy pain to commence, only to see the melee characters rush past all your traps and engage the enemy before they reach the setup...

My main is a Scrapper, and even I find that painful to watch...