-
Posts
251 -
Joined
-
1) Accepting a Magic Fortune causes every one of my characters, and all of the characters of my friends that I team with, to do the Martial Arts Powerset Dragon's Tail animation every single time. Always. We thought that it was an intentional change.
2) It would be a very nice change if the store Travel Powers (Ninja Run, Beast Run, Rocket Board, Magic Carpet) simply suppressed your toggles instead of turning them off. It's not a big deal on my Blasters, but I just can't stand using the store Travel Powers on my Tanks. I kept forgetting to turn all of my toggles back on. -
Yeah, I just completely lost interest in this podcast today.
The last couple of episodes have been like 80% tangent and 20% actually talking about the game. But this week they didn't even waste their time pretending they were actually going to talk about the game. And they pretty much didn't.
For those of you that do decide to keep watching I hope that you enjoy listening to Zwil talk about pretty much everything except the game. -
Quote:The ability to purchase the old "Booster Packs" (Wedding Pack, Super Booster I: Cyborg, etc.), and gift them to someone else, has been asked for since they first came out back in 2008. Positron told us way way back then that this was something that "we're interested in doing."We know it's a highly requested feature, and, as such, we're interested in supporting it. I'm not sure where it is in the pipeline, but I know it's on a list somewhere.
This is essentially the same thing.
So no disrespect intended sir, but "in the pipeline" this is at least three years overdue.
Let me put it this way; I would have purchased and gifted many many of those Super Booster packs to my friends over the years as birthday gifts, Christmas gifts, etc., but I didn't because I was unable to do so.
Which means that Paragon Studios lost out on my money because I couldn't give those packs as gifts to my friends. And now Paragon Studios is losing out on my money because now, three years later, I still can't give City of Heroes in game gifts to my friends.
So does Paragon Studios want my money? -
Quote:I was going to write up a long response to this, but Samuel Tow said it better than I could: "Everybody always says this, but has anyone actually tried it? I keep hearing people say that you can't always fight gods and goddesses because it would grow old. Will it? How do we know? I've never seen a game which let me do that."I'm not asking you to agree with our story telling decisions 100% of the time. I am asking you to discuss the story for it's merit.
Also, if every single fight was against Galactus, it would get a little boring after awhile.
To that I'll add: Isn't fighting God-Like beings what Incarnate content is supposed to be about? What's God-Like about a bunch of angry folks throwing rocks again?
Quote:Personally, I view it more of, you have to learn to walk before you can run.
Having Superman (aka our 50th level characters) being taken down by a couple of mundanes with pebbles is inconsistent story telling to begin with, doing it without explaining the hows and whys to the audience is just plain bad story telling.
P.S. Its is possessive. It's is simply a contraction of it and is. Sorry. One of my pet peeves. -
Yeah... that was exactly how it seemed to me when I watched the Coffee Talk podcast too.
My understanding of the back story of the Incarnate powers is that the Well is infusing us with power and making us Demi-Gods, or something to that effect.
The Devs could have had us go up against Rularuu and his minions. Up til level 50 you were just saving the world, now you're saving the Multi-verse! That would have felt epic and Incarnate.
Instead they're turning us into demi-gods that can't handle rocks being thrown at us by ordinary, un-augmented people. And they can't even understand why some players may have a problem with it.
Wow. Just... wow.
I guess I'll just wait until that solo incarnate path thing comes out. Cause I sure as heck won't be wasting my time with these Incarnate Trials. -
Quote:Well I for one am so glad that you're here to judge the weight of others' posts. Heaven forbid if I had to do that all by myself...Same BS I heard when Inventions launched. By some of the same people. It's of equal weight. I.e. none.
I do have one request to make of you sir.
Please don't forget, the next time you're sitting in a conference room with the City of Heroes Development Team, to make certain that they too are made aware of whose posts' they're supposed to ignore because they aren't weighty enough.
__________
I love how people on this forum sit around bragging about how great and friendly this community is, while never passing up an opportunity to berate and ridicule those members whose opinions don't match their own.
Truth is - this forum community isn't any better than many of the others that I am and have been a part of, and it's not getting better it's getting worse.
I come back after having been unsubscribed for 5 months to see you guys attacking Samuel_Tow of all people. Yeah. Nice friendly community you've got here. Now I remember why I no longer wanted to be a part of it. -
Quote:So in a thread that's about Issue 20 it's not appropriate for a person to discuss what they'd really like to see in Issue 20?I have my own list of things I'd like to be fixed or to be created. I don't add to every patch notes thread, "What? No <fill in the blank>?" about it.
I agree with you that there are systems which are languishing or need to be fixed. I bring them up when appropriate.
Like I said, I almost never solo, but I am in complete agreement with Samuel on this one. His posts are about what he wants to see in Issue 20 and/or future issues. Your posts are whining cause you don't like the content of his posts.
Now tell me whose posts' are more 'on topic'. -
Quote:Fair enough Zombie Man, in fact I agree with you that someone that plays an MMO and expects a lot of solo content is like someone that plays football and expects to never have to handle the ball. Personally if I'm not respecing/crunching common IOs/working on the base I'm running missions on a team. I do however have my own list of complaints that I'd like to post in this thread, I hope that my post will be acceptable to you sir:What *I* would like is for you and Eiko and the handful of solo-only-ists to stop making *every* *single* *thread* about the near or far future of the game about "Devs hate soloists."
No work on bases, despite being told that Issue 13 was going to be "really big for bases."
Nothing to salvage the wreck that is PvP from the bottom of the well into which it was thrown in Issue 13.
No Powerset Proliferation. We've only been asking for Super Strength and Energy Melee on Scrappers since before proliferation started.
Bank missions still haven't been added to Oroborus, despite Positron saying this would happen over 2 years ago.
Jetpacks still aren't a back option, we've been asking about that for years too. At one point we were even told that JLove had spent a lot of time working on a large number of Jetpacks. So were are they?
Devices still languishes broken while the devs address issues with Brutes and Scrappers and Tankers.
Now I have no intention to vent my spleen about these issues in every single thread that I read. So how about if I limit my complaining to just those threads that involve the latest issue and those that involve future changes/content. Would that be acceptable?
And if it is, then would if also be ok for the "die hard soloists" to post their complaints in just those threads as well? If not then why not? -
Quote:If this is something that you want to do DW then that's great, but don't make the mistake of thinking that any results will come from it.However regarding changes to the bases this is a direct email from Avatea as to what the BBC can accomplish.
What Avatea is doing to you DW is exactly what the devs have always done. Stringing you along with absolutely no intention of actually doing anything with your list.
They told the PvPers to remain calm and courteous and make a list. The list was then completely ignored when they did their total PvP revamp.
The base building community already had multiple lists up on the forums. Then, when Sunspot or whatever his name is, was announced as the 'Base Dev' he said to us, "Make a list." Several people included links to previous lists and all he said was, "Make a new list."
So Mad Scientist (remember him?) made yet another list. Then we heard nothing. Then we heard that Issue 13 was going to be split in half and base changes weren't going to be in either half. Then after I PMed Sunspot begging him to come to base forums and post anything, he posted in the base forums, "Sorry. Nothing happening with bases."
So write up your list if you really want to DW, but realize that the devs are just stringing you along with absolutely no intention of actually doing anything with your list, again.
-
Was there ever any response from the dev team on this?
Did that "Base Committee" ever accomplish anything?
Or are improvements to bases as dead and buried as they appear to be? -
Quote:Ok, I have to ask. What is this "committee" that I've seen mentioned several times in this thread?If the Committee can accomplish everything they set out to, I will gladly applaud their efforts.
I monitor the dev and community trackers daily, and I haven't seen anything about any committee. -
So basically Hollywood has finally realized that they're full of idiots. But instead of giving good writers a chance they're just going to remake every single good movie from the 60's and 80's.
I hate Hollywood. -
Quote:I agree.Just plain no on the radius reduction, enemies are fairly good at shoving 1/3rd to half of the way in as it stands.
On my Bots/FF MM I regularly use Force Bubble as an excellent area denial power. Reducing the size of Force Bubble would only ruin an already weak set.
If you don't like the size of Force Bubble then don't take it, take Repulsion Field instead. -
I'm a paying customer. Courteously offering a list of complaints that I have about a service that I'm paying for is not whining.
For those of you that are tired of reading forum posts complaining about the MA I can only say: I'm not going to apologize if you're annoyed by people who don't agree with you that everything is Happy Happy Joy Joy with the MA. -
Dr. Aeon,
I have to agree with some of the other negative posters here. I understand that you're trying to improve and increase traffic to/in the AE, but I believe that the AE and its customers would be better served by your taking a number of other actions instead.
1) Running a script to delete the copious amount of plainly titled farm arcs.
2) Look through and fix the DC arcs that your previous patches have broken.
3) Lower the number of plays necessary to get into the Hall of Fame, and once there, have the arc remain locked in the HoF for a minimum amount of time so as to prevent griefers from bouncing it right back out.
4) STOP BREAKING ARCS every time you guys patch the AE to fix yet another one of the exploits that we warned you about in beta but you refused to listen to us and fix back then.
While I do have a free AE slot, I also will not be entering this contest. I am not interested in participating in this until the devs listen to us and start fixing the AE the way we've been asking you to since it first went live.
Take care doctor.
- Peregrine Falcon -
Forbidden Planet (1956) 98 minutes
or my personal favorite
Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986) 103 minutes
Both are good stories with well developed characters, and your students have probably never seen either of them. -
The character that I've always thought was an obvious Mary Sue is Statesman.
Jack even said that Statesman was a character that he created years before CoH/V in his table top RPG Champions game.
Statesman is supposed to be an Invuln/SS Tanker and yet he has a higher damage output than most Scrappers. In game, our characters might be able to take a Rikti dropship if there are 50 or more of us with a select combination of powers, but according to game lore, Statesman knocked a Rikti mothership out of the sky by himself with his bare hands.
So yeah. Maybe it's just me. Obvious Mary Sue. -
The Hidden Hand #374410 (level range 30-54), is my first attempt at a serious story arc. After getting feedback from a couple of friends, and a review by Police Woman, I've updated it quite a bit. But it still needs help.
This arc has two things about it that I think are unusual.
First is that I've tried to construct a story arc about Nemesis that has him acting as the unbelievably intelligent, competent and dangerous individual that our contacts keep claiming that he is. I say this because in the actual dev written arcs about him that I've played (which I think is all of them) he comes off as an incompetent, mustache-twirling, megalomaniac whose overly complex plans keep getting quashed by every random super hero that stumbles across them. In my arc he has a simple goal and has set up a plan that's as simple as possible, that also takes the existence of super powers into account. And in my arc he feels no ego-driven impulse to intentionally leave silly clues to let the heroes know who's actually behind it all.
The second unusual aspect of my arc is that I use the mission exit pop-ups to tell the story of what's really happening to the audience (the players). Unless your character concept is one of total omniscience there's no way that the character could possibly find out this information, but it shows the players what's actually happening. I think this is where the major problem lies.
I've received some criticism that this second storyline makes the players feel like they've been played for chumps. That's why I need help with this arc. I'm really looking for a better way to show Nemesis as he's supposed to be without making the players feel like they've caught the idiot ball (to use someone else's favorite phrase).
I'm not asking for full blown reviews, but I would most certainly appreciate any help and advice and criticism that anyone has to give on improving The Hidden Hand. -
For me it depends on the genre of the movie.
I loved Die Hard (the first one). In that movie an ordinary guy spends most of his time running from the bad guys because they outnumber him. Sure there's some stuff blowing up, but the fight scenes and firefights are pretty realistic for Hollywood.
Now if it's a super hero movie then I expect flying and cars flipping and exploding. A super hero movie without those is boring, what's the point of even making that type of movie without those things.
I really dislike movies where otherwise normal people are able to do crazy unrealistic stuff. Like fall from great heights, shoot down helicopters with a pistol, and cause cars to explode with a cigarette.
As long as the logic of the story or movie is internally consistent I'm usually ok with it. -
It looks like Castle may already be working on this. See this thread:
Question: What powers do you want Alternate animations for? -
So we're both in agreement that ETs DPS was out of wack and that PvP had probably somewhere between very little and nothing to do with why ET was nerfed. So this just leaves us with two questions.
1) The Timing - Why did Castle choose to nerf ET at that particular moment in time?
2) The Method - Why did Castle nerf ET in that specific manner?
So here's how my brain arrived at my conclusion to this.
1) He had the time. This was probably the biggest factor. Castle happened to have the time at that particular moment and he probably knew that he wasn't likely to have much free time in the future. But then that brings up the next question: Why did Castle choose to spend his time at that particular moment on ET instead of any of a dozen other things?
2) Why didn't Castle simply go into the chart and change some numbers? Recharge and/or damage? That's what they did when they nerfed Ignite. Why did he bring Back Alley Brawler into it and change the animation time? Something that's (to my knowledge, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) only been done once before, with Flares. And with Flares we know that the animation was changed only because they were standardizing all of the Blaster Tier 1 and 2 attacks. Unlike the other animations, where BaB was just able to shave a bit of time off of the animations here and there, they simply couldn't do it with the old Flares animation.
So why didn't they do it that way with ET? Why did Castle choose the one route that most certainly took the most time and effort? And also just happened to be the one way that players couldn't do anything about with IOs?
So that's why I believe that Scrappers are the reason that Castle nerfed ET. Scrappers base damage modifier, the timing of the change, and the manner in which he changed it. You may not agree with me, but at least you can't honestly say that I haven't arrived by my belief in a logical manner. -
Yes, ETs DPS was always out of wack. But the entire set depended on that particular power in order to keep a decent DPS. As you know Bill, by nerfing that one power it dropped EMs DPS considerably.
Look, I'm not part of some tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theory. I'm not and do not ascribe any type of sinister motivations to Castle or to his actions. ET needed to be nerfed, you and I both know this. I just think that prior to IOs and power proliferation Castle didn't see it as it important or game-breaking.
I think that the devs probably thought EM was fine for PvE. Sure ETs DPA was out of line, but EM paid for it by having almost no AoE ability. And as we've seen, in PvE AoE is king.
Now maybe PvP factored into it, and maybe not. The timing of the PvP changes makes me think that it probably didn't have much to do with it.
But then along came IOs and Super Scrappers soloing everything in the game. EBs, AVs, Rikti Pylons, Monsters, GMs, God, etc. Castle knew that EM was going to get ported to Scrappers. It's my belief that's what made Castle finally decide that he had to nerf ET. I'm guessing that EM probably hasn't been ported yet because the devs have been busy doing other stuff - like Going Rogue.
Sure Brutes can solo AVs, but because of the Brute AT damage base, neither Build Up nor Against All Odds has the huge effect for Brutes that it does for Scrappers. Also, believe it or not, some people had a hard time (even before the changes) keeping the Fury bar filled. With Scrappers that's simply not an issue. They do full damage 100% of the time!
I read and posted in more than one thread back then about the ET nerf. I remember Castle saying that it was being nerfed because its DPS was too high. I'm not disputing that. What I do dispute is the opinion, that seems to be held by many people, that it was nerfed because of PvP. The timing of the PvP changes, which Castle had to have been aware of when he nerfed ET, just makes it seem very unlikely to me. -
Quote:I stated my belief in a calm and courteous manner. What was it about my post that made it necessary for you to be so insulting? And where is your citation that validates your belief?ET was nerfed to hell because its DPA was off the charts. That's it. Nothing else.
Yes ETs DPA was off the charts, but it was always that way. Why was that ok for years? Why was it that ETs DPA was ok when Tankers and Brute and Stalkers had access to it and Scrappers didn't? Why was it, that only after power proliferation began, that it suddenly became necessary for Castle to nerf it? Why wasn't EM ported to Scrappers years ago?
It is my belief, and I've always stated that it's my belief, that ET was overpowered but Castle didn't really care until it looked like he'd have to port it to Scrappers. Once he ran the numbers and saw what ET would do in the hands of a Scrapper he suddenly decided that ET had to be nerfed.
Do you really believe that all of the threads about IO'd out soft-capped Scrappers and Scrappers taking down AVs single-handedly had absolutely nothing to do with it?
Please don't bother to respond if you can't do so without being a complete [censored]. -
Quote:Oh, you mean it was because of PvP?Citation needed. Your opinion on the matter doesn't seem related to reality.
The PvP that was completely changed so that if ET had been left the same it wouldn't have been overpowered?
The ET nerf went live on July 9th 2008. Issue 13 went live with the PvP 'rebalancing' on December 2nd 2008. You're telling me that Castle that changed the ET animation wasn't already working on the PvP rebalancing? Or didn't at least have an idea that it was going to happen?
Ok, so let's say I'm wrong. Let's say that the ET nerf wasn't because of the upcoming port to Scrappers. Then why was the animation time changed? The one thing that can't be affected by IOs.
And can someone tell me why Castle wouldn't have been concerned about IO'd out perma-Hasten Scrappers firing off Build Up - Energy Transfer - Total Focus - Energy Transfer - when they fight EBs and AVs? I don't have the old numbers stored anywhere, but wouldn't that combination of attacks along with say... Against All Odds, be enough to put most EBs down in less than 10 seconds?
EDIT: EM was never overpowered in PvE normally. But wouldn't it have been on Scrappers when fighting single hard targets? Like say... Pylons or EBs or AVs? -
Quote:Not at all.You forgot why it got nerfed in the first place, didn't you?
ETs animation time got changed in preparation for being ported to Scrappers. Castle didn't want an IO'd out perma-Hasten Scrapper to be able to fire off two ETs under the same application of Build Up.