NeverDark

That's an interface change, not a mechanic change. All you're changing is where you're seeing the ability to apply a flypose. It doesn't suddenly solve the problem of actually allowing you to select a flypose in a method other than as already exists.

Cool story bro.

Actually, players like XP. At launch, street sweeping was exponentially more popular than missions because it was way, way more rewarding. One of my early scrappers cut his teeth on an eight-man team cleaning up Boomtown. It took a reduction in debt while indoors and massive mission complete bonuses to get players to see missions as worth the time.

There's a difference between removing annoyances and redesigning the game. One of the main principles behind the game is that mez exists, and it affects certain archetypes more than others. It affects gameplay at a fundamental level; the developers considered it so important that they gave buffing sets the potential to mitigate it for their teammates. You're as likely to see the threat of mez removed as you are to see the need to manage endurance removed. It's just part of the game.

It still doesn't address the issue that it helps reactive mitigation, such as heals or debuffs, less than proactive mitigation. Any mechanic that deals with the percentage of team health is automatically going to favor Empathy (which can control that) over Force Field (which can't).

I seem to recall someone asking Jack long, long ago if players could help create more maps and tilesets to help alleviate the monotony. He said there were ugly legal issues, and it was unlikely to happen.

People going to PAX, lucky #@$&s that they are.

Ah, there's that post. Now it's really ready.

By that logic, nothing can be changed in the game ever. As soon as it hits the live servers, it becomes "part of the game" and thus holy and untouchable. If the devs ever change their minds about anything, or realize an oversight, or find a problem, that's just too bad. The players have laid their hands on it, so it's off limits forever.

Will the community react to a change to something that's been in the game for an extended period? Of course. But the duration of a portion of the game has no bearing on its merit. A problem is a problem whether it was introduced at launch or yesterday.

And the devs are ready for this situation. Just because they're resolving it in a way you dislike doesn't make them suddenly incompetant; they saw something they perceived as a problem and they found a way to fix it.


Go to Atlas park and count the number of times you see a boss/farm team looking for more. Figure 8 people per team.


What server do you play? Check all servers, I play Virtue, Inifinity, and Justice. I notice it less on Infinity, but farming is still there.

When someone asks for proof to back up your argument, you don't say, "I have it, but you have to find it yourself." At least, not when you want your argument taken seriously.

At this point, you aren't trying to state anything useful.


There's a whole lot of arrogance here, but it's coming from the one calling his opponent "stupid", "ignorant", and "narrowminded".

Hardly. If the developers say that they do not support farming, and there is to be absolutely no farming in the AE, and anyone who uses the AE to farm will be dealt with, then the players are entirely at fault if they ignore that. If you do something the developers, who own and run the game, dislike, you run the risk of having the game changed in a way you dislike.

Sam is using intelligent debate tactics and presenting himself in a reasonable, understanding manner. Even if you disagree with his position, you can see that he's considering you decent enough to try intelligent debate. You're using insults, refusing to support your position, and throwing a fit. Which is the troll?

Right.

In essence, endurance reduction naturally has diminishing returns built into it; each point of reduction does less than the one before it. In cases of powers that cost a lot of endurance, this doesn't matter as much, but the bread-and-butter attacks that one uses all the time don't cost much anyway. Reduction in those attacks tends to only shave off a point or two of endurance, and their drain is smaller but steadier, so the effect of the enhancements isn't as large as you'd think.

Endurance reduction and recovery also magnify each other, so increasing reduction would make Stamina an even better choice than before. I do like the idea of making reduction enhancements more powerful, but it's not going to suddenly make everyone's endurance woes vanish.

Speed Boost does include resistance to slow, but I'd actually add a little more to IR, in addition to Immobilize protection. As it stands, there isn't much reason to use it in combat, and no reason to take it at all if everyone takes travel powers anyway. Slow resistance would make sense conceptually in IR, and it shouldn't be problematic.

Dang, that's an extra 2 guys per turn. Nice grab.

It doesn't quite solve the problem. It takes a little more sting out of the most costly powers, but as endurance reduction is asymptotic, it doesn't help quite as much as it should.

So, no need to worry. It's already happening.

Does it count as Godwin's Law if you declare your opponent to be Soviets instead of Nazis? Or can we get a new law that encompasses that as well?

Woah! Is that our first postcount attack on the new boards?

Since they haven't been posted here yet, here's the YouTube link.

Well, why not? I was under the impression that was the point of being French. That, and eating cheese, drinking wine, and wearing berets.