MajorPrankster
-
Posts
509 -
Joined
-
Quote:I can get behind this. I so want content that is actually hard, content that takes real effort to beat. I don't want the whole game to be that way, I enjoy "arresting" hundreds of enemies at a time, but some 'end game' super hard stuff would be cool.Originally Posted by Zombie Man
I want End Game so leet that not even I can succeed at it.
This, as an end game for a single player game is fine. For an MMO, not so much.Quote:Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
To me, a self-contained, finite experience that ends before it wears out its welcome is far superior to one which splays out over an infinite plain, with eventual suck in the distance in all directions.
IMO, the kvetching we are seeing on the boards is from people who want City to feel like a single player game, with a Shakespearian level story that seems written for their particular tastes and character, that has complete closure on every story ever produced.
That is not an MMO. This one is more a sandbox that allows us to write our characters into the story however we see fit.
IMO, the best end game is a never ending cycle of gaining power and killing pixels. It's nice of the pixels change now and again for flavor, even better if there are occasional good one-liners "Don't run, you'll only die tired" and funny plot devices, "Time to save the World, again."
My end game starts with the last episode of SG-1. We are going right back into the Gate, because there is always another threat, be it one that has returned, a new one, or just a group of bad guys that found a powerful artifact or something.
I play to kill pixels and relieve stress from a RL world in which it is sometimes tough to get through the day without wanting some X-Ray vision to unleash upon the idiots I have to deal with in my life.
I do not play these games for a good story, I'll read a book for that.
I do not play these games to extend my imaginations limits, I'll play PnP games for that.
I do not play these games to enhance my self worth, I'll play the stock market for that.
I play this games, and others like it, to make pixels go boom and laugh with my friends when we all faceplant. Nothing more.
IMO, expecting more from this form of entertainment is not a reasonable expectation. Nice if you get a good story now and again, I won't argue that, but it's not what I expect. -
Quote:To be blunt, IMO, those self imposed barriers are irrelevant.Originally Posted by Chyll
And I haven't seen a one of us with this issue claiming otherwise. But that does not make the barrier any less true or valid.
The development team should not, IMO, change anything (drastically at least) to please people in the mindset that puts up those kind of barriers.
These players choose to prevent themselves from participating in certain content. That has been true for parts of the game from Day 1.
These types of players, IMO, enjoy languishing in their angst over trivial points and arguing about them passionately. I have been playing games with gamers of this type for 30+ years.
Edge cases are not what an intelligent software company, or any company for that matter, generally produce products for; intelligent companies try to please the most people they can. From the number of people in game, IMO Paragon is doing a good job.
As mentioned here in the thread and elsewhere, those players that base their main judgement criteria for the game around story content are in the minority in my experience. While good stories can gain and keep customers, it's really not what most MMO players are looking for to keep them hooked.
As for the end-game not 'feeling' like the rest of the game, IMO, I see no difference in the 'feel' of the game. I arrest bad guys and get more powerful, just like I have for years. -
Quote:This is my take on most of the displeasure with the end game, along with the fact that so many don't want to step back realize that Paragon is just getting started with it. New content and what not that some people want to go along with the Incarnate stuff takes time.Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect
So, if something introduced 7 years into the game's life is the point of getting to 50, what was the point before?
It's not compulsory, it is just as optional as everything else. The only thing that makes it required is your feeling that you HAVE to do it. You can keep doing whatever you were doing before this and the game will just have to deal with it, because it can't force you to do anything. YOU are the one sitting behind the keyboard deciding what you're doing, not the devs.
Have some patience.
Additionally, as I have mentioned elsewhere, personally, I cannot see a reason to have so much angst over these things. If the game is fun, then play it, if not, don't.
Bringing all of this angst and over analyzing into a video game is just waste of personal energy, IMO, and very detrimental to ones happiness.
Not enjoying a new extension of the mechanics and story is a far cry from having an addition to the game ruining the rest of the game, IMO. -
I agree.
I just love to play. To beat up the bad guys in massive quantities. To kill pixels to relieve stress with colorful powers.
I love that there are things in the game that take a long time to attain. Be that massive IO builds or Incarnate powers or whatever.
I play to play. Some days I play low level new ideas, some days I play my uber built tricked out monsters.
I play to make new ideas come to life in a creative sandbox that has few rivals.
I do not play with nothing more than the goal of getting the very best of everything as quickly as possible.
To use a friends experience one day for an example, he was told on a TF, "We are not here to have fun, we are here to get xp and rewards."
Also, I don't think a game like this has to be perfect. I think there are a number in the current stable of complainers that seem to think anything a coding house produces has to be without flaw, which is simply not possible.
I simply do not understand the outlook necessary to find the faults the game does have to be so horrible as to think they matter enough to whine about as some posters do. I just don't get it. The game is fun ans entertaining. -
Quote:Thanks! That is the number I was looking for!Originally Posted by Lucky666
You actually only need about 78ish percent recharge with hasten 3 slotted for perma dom if that helps ya. I shoot for 80 for lag or anything like that.
Now I am saddened by the millions I just spent, but hey, it's only Inf, i'll make more.
I thought once I hit about 80 was when it happened. -
I have a Mind/Electric Dom that is swiftly becoming my favorite character I have ever played.
Right now, my global recharge is about 95.
It seems, between that and hasten, once I get started, I can maintain perma-dom, since when hasten is up, I am at about 165, it seems to give me the 'average' of the 125-ish needed for perma.
Yet from what I read, I did not think this was going to be possible unless I got 125 w/o hasten or to 105 to make hasten perma, thus pushing me over the 125 all the time.
If I can get perma that way I have, then, of course, that leaves more slots for defense which would rock.
Thoughts? -
Count me in!
I cannot make a character that does not have at least one power with it anymore. -
Quote:Originally Posted by TheJazMan
So, instead of some fantastic space station, a spectacular alien city (not Rikti) or something else completely different....we get....a bunch of ships slapped together. Ugh.
I sure am glad I am not this bitter and unhappy. It must really suck.Quote:Originally Posted by Necrotron
As unimpressed by the art as I am, I'm even less impressed by how the screenshot was taken without antialiasing or anistropic filtering.
On a lighter note, thanks Paragon for giving us glimpses into the process! The last time I tried to make any 3d models like this, the tools I was using were antiques and it took forever. -
Quote:Thank you for posting this.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
...But right now a casual player that teams can max out Alpha with less effort than it takes the average MMO player in other MMOs to find the end game much less progress in it.
If you don't team, it can be less accessible. If you spend very little time playing, it can also be less accessible. But anyone who thinks this game was specifically targeted at soloing players with heavy time constraints is not being realistic. I have sympathy for players in that situation, but I do not extend that sympathy to accepting the notion that this game's current design is predicated on the assumption that time constrained soloers are required to have access to all in-game rewards and progressional paths at rapid earning rates. This game tries to be solo-friendly. It tries to be casual friendly. It does not and in my opinion should not be bounded by the reward earning rates of the slowest possible players that can possibly exist by virtue of eliminating all but the slowest possible earning paths and then playing them for the minimum amount of credible playtime.
It put forth the viewpoint I have about both the end game and it's detractors in language that is much more civil than I typically care to use.
In all my years of MMO gaming, I have never understood why someone that limits themselves either through available play time or through being unable/unwilling to participate in certain activities like teaming, expects to get the same return on investment as those that will spend the time and energy to gain the rewards. -
Quote:Even though Arcanaville may think I have a mental problem for saying so,Originally Posted by EvilGeko
It's a game. You shouldn't be uncomfortable doing ANYTHING in this or many other games. There are no consequences here that mean anything.
By contrast, NOTHING IN THIS GAME matters. Nothing. It's all a means to pass the time between birth and death. Almost no video game should have that much consequence that people feel 'uncomfortable.'
In a video game, almost none. I do recognize certain exceptions when games can be created in such a way as they do have real relevance outside of the game. For example, a game that objectifies and demeans women in a manner without legitimate scientific, artistic or cultural merit (or even with those things). In such a case, I must recognize that there is something to be uncomfortable about.
, this is a lot of what I was trying to convey before in my post.
No game can take me out of my comfort zone because there are no real life consequences to any choice in the game I might make.
It's ALL super pretendy fun time to me. That's it, that's all no more. It is entertainment. A pastime.
I cannot do anything in terms of playing a video game, hateful or racist chatting, etc. aside, that has real world consequences.
Killing, or arresting if you prefer, pixels does not have any bearing on my real life.
Personally, even the moral story choices don't phase me for the same reason. In moral choice games I go down the evil path as far as it will let me, as fast as I can, just to see what the developers are willing to do.
As a side example, the character I am most well known for in the PnP games I played for 30 years before City sucked me in, was an evil priest-like guy. His opening story, that I created and played with friends, involved having an imminent Tsunami hit his home island and to survive, he sacrificed every child virgin on the island to his god, then kept the pinky finger of each one and turned them into his most powerful magic items over time. That was just the beginning. The portable magical temple to sacrifice the entire elven population came later. That is pretty much as far from my personal moral compass as it gets, yet it bothered me not all because it is all make-believe, just like a video game.
The idea of a video game making me uncomfortable is so far out of what my brain chemistry dictates, the only way I can even begin to comprehend it is the fact that my wife has shown me how these games can affect other humans.
It's a video game. It's entertainment, but it does not 'matter' like real life does. -
Quote:I want to respond to this, even though it was not aimed at me, personally.Originally Posted by Tyger
And if it was the other way round; you'd be cheesed off too.
No, I would not.
While I can understand losing the handle you are used to having could be a bummer, it is not as drastic as a sex change that another poster postulated.
I do not understand why some people (especially for a GAME) cannot deal with the fact that companies often have to implement changes and systems that are the best they can accomplish given the resources they have.
Individuals, everyday, make choices for themselves and other using the same logic. You do the best you can with the resources you have available.
It's called reality. And yes, sometimes it sucks.
However, at the end of the day, it really is 'just a game' handle. Life will go on and you wil be able to play the game with more people. -
Quote:Feels more like heartburn, or that taste you get in your mouth when you throw-up just a little after watching the young and hip actors react to something bad happening on shows like SGU.Originally Posted by Golden Girl
Does it cause you angst?
-
Comfort and fun are, of course, terribly subjective.
To me, it is either fun, or not. If it is not fun, then I won't continue to do it.
As for comfort, there is nothing in any video game I have ever done that has made me feel what I would refer to as discomfort. Some things are not fun or entertaining to play, but none of them ever made me uncomfortable.
What seems, to me, that is bubbling forth from a number of players and being referred to here as comfort is something I can relate to however, because of watching my wife play another game.
In that game, she is pretty much unable to make story choices that she considers to be mean or evil. She gleefully cuts things in half and giggles about all the realistic blood flying around, however. She always chooses the good and nice story path and is uncomfortable making any decision that her own moral code would not condone.
Additionally, she does not play multi-player games, with the exception of those that we can play together. MMOs are out of the question, because she is uncomfortable playing with so many other people, for a variety of reasons. The mechanics, in a sense, make her uncomfortable.
So, while I find no discomfort in games, I understand it better than I might otherwise from talking for hours on end with her about it while we play our respective games three feet from one another.
What I do not understand is why anyone would continue to try and justify playing CoH when it becomes not fun, or uncomfortable. The day, nay the minute, that City is no longer fun for me, I will simply not play it any longer. For me, it is really that simple.
I really do not understand the level of analyzing (and agonizing) that some posters seem to put into the various aspects of both game play and story in City to, in some way, convince themselves to play or not to play. In short, I don't do angst. Can't stand it.
So, from my viewpoint, personally, it is not possible to take me out of my comfort zone in a game, because I cannot fathom a way for it to make me uncomfortable. I can, however, understand that an evil story could turn someone off comfort-wise and I can understand that a mode of game-play could not be fun for someone.
Additionally, I thrive on change, which apparently makes me abnormal. I see a new thing and I run over to check it out and figure out how it works, etc. If I like it great, if not, I move on to something else or return to what I was doing. To me, stagnant equals waiting to die.
So, I think that if there is no choice, story-wise or mechanics-wise, that keeps you comfortable you should probably just find another game. It's what my wife does and it works well for her.
As for the specific question of 'should', that is another hot-button for me. Should is a 'guilt word' like 'could' and 'would'. It implies an obligation or responsibility. I view games as art, and therefore they just exist. I take them for what they are, just as I view a statue, I like it or I don't. Having known many artists in my life, they seem to ascribe very little underlying meaning, generally, to what they make; it is the critics and observers that typically lay on all of the meanings to each brush stroke or chisel mark.
Games, therefore, have to me only one obligation, which is to be entertaining. They have no other obligations. There is nothing they should or should not do other than be fun. If they are not fun, or certain aspects are not fun, then those aspects or the entire game will simply not be something I will play. -
Quote:I agree.Originally Posted by Ironblade
As far as I can tell, though, it seems a lot of people are starting to sound like victims. The game is forcing me to do this. I have to make a choice between this and that. I'm going to fall behind.
All these martyr cards being played are really getting old. -
Quote:Fair enough.Originally Posted by Hydrophidian
'Cavalier' as in: haughty, disdainful, or supercilious; offhand or unceremonious; domineering.
-
Quote:I mainly want to respond to the caviler comment.Originally Posted by Hydrophidian
Yah, I'd agree, some folks are being a bit alarmist right now. On the other hand, I think others are being a tad too cavalier and dismissive about the whole thing. The truth is, it's impossible to say what sort of impact this is all going to have in the long-term, because the developers aren't telling us what their basic design strategy is for the franchise. And they ain't likely to, either. At least not in a way that isn't empty, lawyer-vetted market-speak.
It's a game. Why would I be anything but cavalier toward it?
Seriously. Why?
I cannot think of anything that could happen to the game that would make me get as emotional about it as some people seem to be about it, resetting all characters to level 1, adding the PvP mechanics to PvE, any of the 'worst case' scenarios are just going to make think "hmm..interesting, let's see how this works" and then log in and play.
City is, unquestionably, my favorite hobby. I spend as much or more time per week in game most weeks as I do at work. Even if it shutdown tomorrow, I don't see any reason to be anything other than cavalier about it. -
Quote:I am not trying to be hostile, but these are emotional arguments.Originally Posted by Psychic Guardian
That bold part is the problem, with the alpha system, and from what I've heard all future incarnate system's we have access to preview, any player with a dayjob and more than 10 50s will not be able to "keep up" with the new features.
For most of us "what's stopping us" from doing other things is the fear of falling behind with our 50s. Sure right now the only thing that requires an alpha are the Apex and Tin Mage...but what about the next release, the bar will be raised again, and likely again before all incarnate features are out. And when those become the new shiny people who don't care to try it/don't have a character meeting the requirements to try it will be hard-pressed to find a team willing to do something else with them.
I forgot to mention what SR did because I'd pushed it out of my mind. But I also wish they had told us how long the WSTs will run. 50 assists when you've already done it that week is nuts, but like him it will haunt me til the day I quit if the system is removed before I get the badges for it. (I'm also not saying it should run forever, all the new people doing TFs because they need Notice of the Wells are screwing with the market)
Fear is simply not a rational outlook about a game, it is an emotional one.
There has been absolutely no indication that the WST will ever go away. None.
Additionally, feeling like you have to 'keep up' with anyone, about anything, in a game, is not rational, IMO.
As I have stated up thread I apparently don't have nearly the level of emotional responses to change and new things that other people do, so take my thoughts as you will.
With that stated, I do not want decisions to be made for the game based on emotions. I do not want emotional responses from players to have very much weight with the decisions the developers make for the future of the game. -
Quote:Luminara, you are one of the posters I respect most on these boards. I am not trying to attack you.Originally Posted by Luminara
It's not our fault that we're continuing to play the game the way we were told to play it, and getting nothing but frustrated, disillusioned and burned out fast. The complete lack of developer commentary or community participation lately hasn't improved the situation, either. The complaints are perfectly valid and justified. The players did what they were supposed to do, what they were told to do. The developers screwed up. They were the ones who designed and implemented an advancement system that punishes players for doing what they were told to do.
Why does there have to be fault and blame?
If a player chooses to continue making new characters, nothing is stopping them.
If a player chooses to focus on just a few, nothing is stopping them.
This has not changed since the day the game opened.
No one is being punished, that is absurd hyperbole.
This sounds just like people saying they were being 'forced' not to play their characters because of the day job mechanic.
The rate at which one can progress into the Incarnate levels of power is simply different than the rate at which one can level from 1-50. It will, potentially, take a lot longer.
So? Where is the problem? I don't see it. -
So, basically, the OP does not like rooting and is trying to use the BM fight as a poster child of some sort to prove rooting is bad.
In other words, yet another person that wants a basic game mechanic changed, simply because they disagree with it.
I do not understand the logic of wanting to change the game just because of some dislike of a basic mechanic, especially when, judging from the information I have at hand from posts and in-game chatter, the BM fight has been well received overall. I would agree that a change would be warranted if some large percentage of the players attempting the TF were unable to complete it, but that is not the case.
I freely admit that apparently, according to a number of people I have been having discussions about this with, I am the abnormal human for not wanting to change everything around me to my liking, rather than adapt. I even been asked, here on these boards and in RL, "Are you even human?"
I just don't understand the outlook of 'change it because I don't like it'.
The human brain is just fascinating. -
Quote:I just had to say, this is the healthiest and most well-balanced outlook to playing City that I have, I think, ever seen anyone post on these boards.Originally Posted by GavinRuneblade
It had no effect at all on my playstyle. I play all my alts, and I always did. I have unlocked the alpha on all of my 50s, including the ones who leveled since i19. More than half were unlocked as a side effect of helping people who were in Oro asking for help with trapdoor. I have level shifted only 3 of them, none deliberately, I just play them and if I get enough rewards for an upgrade, great, if not, great!
As far as I'm concerned, it's a game and for me the is fun comes from playing not having. the rewards are pretty much meaningless to me. I don't hunt badges deliberately, I don't grind accolade powers, and I don't grind shards. I just do what's fun. None of my characters are optimized. I have a fire/shield brute who "should" have been a scrapper because both sets perform better on scrappers. I have a dark/dark stalker, where both those sets are weakest. And none of them are properly slotted. Hell, about half my characters still don't have inherent fitness because I haven't respecced them.
I contribute to the team. I can solo and have fun at 0/0 no bosses with every character no matter how gimped. Everything else is gravy.
Incarnate content will have no effect on my play. When I log in I go through the list and find which character has been logged out the longest and play that one. =) Unless a team asks specifically for something, then I'll swap.
I think a lot of players could learn from taking a serious look at this viewpoint of the game.
Frankly, I wish there were more people like you posting, because in my experience, you represent a large portion of the player base.
The OMG I have to have it all NAO crowd posting no-stop has really started to grate on me; this is a refreshing change.
Thanks! -
Seriously, why be repressed by the Lore introduced in the game, be it the new Lore power or the story in general.
I am starting to get a lot more moments of "Huh?" from many posters on this one.
I have never and will never allow the story presented in CoH from damaging my enjoyment of beating up the bad guys.
And that is why I play and why many of my friends play, regardless of that anecdotal sample size. We play to beat up bad guys and look at pretty graphics while we do that, to wind down from real life.
Why would you let the fact that some part of the CoH story does not jive for your character? Just don't in corporate it into your own back story!
I don't care one whit where the CoH story says my powers come from for instance. My powers, for my characters come from where I say they come from, period. If that fits within the CoH lore, great, if not, I could not care less.
For something like the Incarnate Lore power, you can creatively explain that power in any number of ways, from a captured prisoner to someone whose life you saved to just being a hologram.
All I am trying to say here, is that I do not understand why people would allow their creative story telling for their own characters to be repressed in any fashion, much less allow their actually enjoyment of playing, just because some parts of the story presented by CoH does not agree with them.
Not even mentioning the fact that very few, if any, comic book based universes are consistently logical.
Write your own story! Enjoy the pretty lights! Why let anything get in the way of your fun? -
Quote:Yes, I view the Incarnate system as a positive change. More people are playing the game, (from all evidence we as players can see) so how is that not positive? My closest friends are all rejuvenating their love of the game, how is that not positive?Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Not very good, because it's a flawed, one-sided view of the situation. We are all players here, and should really have equal "rights" to be happy. It's a mistake to only ever base development resources based on those who are happy and ignore those who are not. After all, isn't that precisely why the Incarnate system was introduced? I was perfectly happy not having an end game system, but others were not. An end game system was added, and those who were unhappy before are happy now. Do you view that as a positive change?
You don't seem to understand my point. You have claimed, more than once, that you are an unhappy person, in general. I don't want that type of influence on the game. Being unhappy with something specific and giving constructive feedback is good. What you and others have been doing, lately, is NOT constructive feedback, IMO.Quote:Ironically, to claim that you claim you don't want changes to the game based on the outlooks of people currently unhappy with specific aspects of it is the ultimate act of sticking your fingers in your ears and going "LALALALALAL I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"
Sam, what you don't realize, is that I have respected you as a poster and positive influence to the game for many years. We simply differ in our viewpoints on what will continue to make the game profitable.
Yes, I am summarily dismissing many, if not all, of your ideas at this point, based upon a number of factors, not the least of which is that I think you are a 'debbie downer' in general.Quote:Finally, it is not my "ideas" you challenge by making your claim. You are challenging my person, by virtue of dismissing me entirely for being unhappy.
That still does not NOT mean I am challenging you as a human. I am dismissing your ideas about this game, not your life outlook. I am a fairly pessimistic pragmatist myself.
Duh, humans all do that. It's how we live our lives.Quote:Then you only see what you want to see.
I am not preventing you from having a voice, only the Mods can do that. I am expressing differing opinions, which happen to include not wanting to respect yours, for a number of reasons as discussed.Quote:With a very few exception, all cries of martyrdom have been levelled at the player base, and in particular a select few posters. "We people" don't feel wrong by the game or by the developers. Disappointed, maybe, but you can't always get what you want. What "we people" feel wrong by is "you people" who keep insisting on "challenging" us at every turn, stoutly determined to ensure nothing we say ever goes unspat on, lest we be allowed to feel we have a voice.
I can, and will, claim anything I like, just as you do. Does not make it a fact. Morals are a construct of belief. I choose to live in logic. I try very hard not to 'claim' anything that I cannot back up with logic. I don't care one whit about any moral high ground.Quote:How you can take the moral high ground in this situation is beyond me. I'm not saying I've never intentionally played the bad guy in such situation, but at least when I do, I do so with the clear admission that I'll be the bad guy. You can be as much an intolerant Internet bully as is your fancy, that's fine. It comes with the territory. But you don't get to claim righteousness in doing so.
If you like. I knew when I typed that some people would be amused and others would not. Some people can't laugh at themselves, some can.Quote:I agree. I should indeed not hold the funny opinions that I do, which make so many people laugh at me. Has this point not been made enough times already? Should I start a counter?
Now, to re-iterate, show me where I prevented you from expressing your opinion? This, if anything, is the martyrdom I was referring to earlier. I am not doing anything more than expressing my opinions. I am simply not doing them in a way you find pleasing. I am not aware of a rule that says I must.
I have had many posts moderated over the years. Just as you like to toss out, please feel free to report me if you like. *shrug*
I will continue to rail against misinformation and half-baked 'feelings' about how the game should be modified.
Also note, not once, NOT ONCE, will you have seen me post that more solo content should get added to the game. I am, personally, about 70% a solo player. I would LOVE that. But I am not here bashing what has been added in an effort to get more solo content added. I have had enough of this incessant whining from certain posters. I am just as allowed to let that bother me, Sam, as you are allowed to let fire you cannot change the color of in game to bother you. -
I love all the new things that get added to the game.
How ANYONE can not like the fact the games grows in simply beyond me. I realize haters love to hate. They still pay to play, so their money still help me enjoy the game as it grows.
Quote:I am totally with the Geko on this one.Originally Posted by EvilGeko
I will not ignore anyone. I will call them on their crap. I've never put anyone on ignore. There's not one poster that I've seen who doesn't have something of value to contribute.
I find Samuel Tow's ideas on the issue of the Incarnate content to be ridiculous, but I don't have anything against him as a person. He stated above that I didn't like HIM. That's absurd. I don't even know him. I don't have enough information not to like him. I just object to his ideas.
Sam (and others certainty) cannot, will not, accept the fact that someone attacking their opinions is not a personal attack. Being a trained debater showed me this 30 years ago.
I don't have anything against Sam as a person and I am sure I am one of the people referred to in this next post.
This is nothing more than sticking one's head in the sand. The whole point of a discussion board is to encounter and challenge ideas that are different to yours.Quote:Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
It's what I do for people I don't like, and it's worked wonders. In fact, I end up skipping over about half of this thread doing just that.
And this is why I, personally, attack Sams ideas as well as others - they come from a deep sea of unhappiness. Regardless of weather or not I find it enjoyable. How's that for taking responsibility for my actions, Sam?Quote:Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
For me, it has become a case of obstinance. ...
I don't intend to stop being unhappy until something happens to make me happy, and I don't intend to stop talking about it as long as I'm being provoked
I do, however, intend to stop bringing it up out of context.
I do not want changes/'fixes"/additions to the game to have their genesis based upon such an unhealthy outlook.
Nor do I want forums goers to be influenced in by such negative outlooks without being challenged.
I respect every person as a human being who posts here.
I do NOT respect every viewpoint, whack idea, vain posturing or attempted martyrdom espoused be the vocal minority for a very many things discussed on these forums.
As my wife is fond of saying, "If you don't wan't people to laugh at your beliefs, then perhaps you should not have such funny beliefs." -
Quote:If something like this was implemented, I would play it non-stop.Originally Posted by Void_Huntress
Already imagining the Mayhem/Safeguard mission.. One hero gets a key (tradeable between teammates via drag and drop, maybe?).. Villains have X minutes to get the key from the hero in question, grab loot from the vault, then get off the map via the getaway car.
Like in PvE, blowing crap up gets more time, but puts markers on the map so the heroes know where villains are being destructive. Otherwise, heroes don't know where the villains are coming from.
The hero with the key shows up on the map clearly as an objective marker, so no hiding the key.
This puts the heroes on defensive -- thematically appropriate -- with strategic choices like who holds the key, where they set up shop, what percentage of the hero team stays with the key holder, how many go after rampaging villains in the streets.. Does anyone keep watch on the vault, to make sure the villains aren't securing that..
Villains get to decide whether they just go for a straight blitz after the keyholder then the vault in order, or if they try to set up their fight first. The overall situation favors the heroes slightly, but the villains get to have the initiative and decide where and when the fight happens.
Where do I sign up for this?
These are EXACTLY the kind of 'CTF' games I would love to see in-game. -
Quote:Originally Posted by magicj
That reason is teams with healers tend to succeed, whereas teams without healers tend to fail.Oh my.Quote:Originally Posted by magicj
Players like bubbles, but they _need_ heals.
I have seldom seen someone so wrong on these forums that propagated the wrongness so consistently.
Thankfully, I don't team with anyone in-game that has such an incorrect view.
I play on teams daily that do not fail and do not have healers.
I play on teams daily with high damage mitigation, be it bubbles or other defense, good controls, etc.
I never, ever, participate in teams that start with the 'we need a healer' crap either. I drop immediately if I see this sentiment echoed in anything other than jest.
Personally, I do not expect any character of any AT with any powerset to do any specific thing. I just want everyone to participate and give something meaningful. So take your shields or not, skip your heals or not, I don't care.
But continuing to propagate 'every team needs heal to succeed' is simply laughable.