SpittingTrashcan

Scrapper or Brute.

For either, Willpower is particularly kind to beginners; be sure to take Indomitable Will, Rise to the Challenge, and Quick Recovery when they become available.

Saying what I already said, but in different words:

Radio missions encourage ignorance. That's an unfortunate design decision. Talking about evidence of player ignorance created by design decisions is useful; laughing at players for following the path the design creates for them is just kind of mean.

No, this game is tedious.

As one of the usual bullet points used to address this particular sort of canard has not yet been rolled out, I suppose it falls to me:

The developers who are working on booster packs are not necessarily the same developers who have work to do on Going Rogue. Booster packs tend to have a preponderance of art-related content. The art resources for GR are probably already done, since we've already had a massive asset pre-download. This leaves the art team with a bit of touch-up work to deal with issues that come up during beta, and not a lot else to do - so they may as well make booster packs while the programming and design team sweat over GR beta fixes.

So, in short, not making boosters will not help GR come out faster.

I'd like to note that the costume components with independent animations - fluttering wings, waving tails - are also explicitly not integrated with the full-body animations of most powers. I have doubts that the techniques used for these optional additional parts would be extendable to the core body animations.

I think it's worth noting how the comic can be read as the villains' rampant egotism being used against them to deny them an easy victory. That was my initial reading, in fact, and it took the responses of others to see that it has a different interpretation under the assumption that concern over personal reputation is a serious objection.

Today I learned I am relatively humble.

With respect to the tail being part of a paid expansion rather than a free item: this may be the best alternative. I am not privy to how the build process and the paid content gating system works, but it may be possible that if the tail is not part of the paid Mutant pack, it would have to be held back until the next free content update. That would be Issue 18, which is scheduled for after GR. So: if the only options are $10 tail now or free tail in a few months, then given the vehemence of the demand, I can see why they went with $10 tail now.

Of course, as I said, I do not know if the devs have the flexibility to release content between major builds, or to include free content in the same update as paid content. If someone can provide an example of either happening in the past, then of course my point is moot.

Also: I understand the principle being stood on, but I still have to laugh a little at the absurdity of choosing not to buy a product because it contains more desirable features than it did when one chose to buy it.

The Dominator AT ranged and melee damage modifiers were increased. Separately, several Dominator Assault powers had their damage, endurance, and recharge increased by some proportion. Also, some powers were upgraded from "utility" powers doing trivial damage to powers doing damage in proportion to their endurance cost. The end result is that the powers that were not otherwise altered do more damage per endurance, and the ones that were altered do even more damage and also cost more endurance. Overall, Dominator damage per endurance was lowered, but it became possible to do more damage and spend more endurance over the same period of time. I would consider this a buff: there are more ways to mitigate endurance consumption than there are ways to increase damage over time.

For what it's worth, I'm willing to engage in attempting to change your mind, on your terms, and don't find it unreasonable that an attempt to change your mind would be subject to your terms. :P

The issue is basically with the developers being on the hook for delivering the promised experience, even though the players have a hand in shaping it. When players cause other players to have an experience at odds with their prior expectations, the developers have to choose between prohibiting the mode of interaction, or setting a new norm and risking the loss of players for whom that new norm is not enjoyable. The existing norm is that one may be buffed in the shared world and by teammates in instances without consent, but that these buffs last a maximum of 4 minutes and do not persist across sessions. While alone in an instance, a player is inviolate to new external player buffs and can expect to lose any existing ones in 4 minutes or less. Mystic Fortune sets a new norm with a buff that lasts 20 minutes and persists across sessions. (It also has a chance of applying a debuff, or damage, but those are not unique to Mystic Fortune - the duration and persistence are.)

Basically, the prior rule was "after 4 minutes in an instance, your gameplay experience is only affected by your actions, the actions of people you have chosen to interact with via teaming, and the choices of the developers." Sans Mystic Fortune prompt, this rule, which has been true for many years and has had time to become a player expectation, is no longer true. While player actions are the proximal cause of whatever dissatisfaction results, the developers are the ones on the hook for changing the experience.

I agree that in the grand scheme of things, this is a pretty minor alteration. It's not like they've suddenly introduced open-world PvP or automatic assignment teaming or anything of that scale. I personally don't have a problem with it. But it does change the rules, and apparently it changes them enough to make people reconsider whether they want to play a game with this level of player control of their experience. It's not so much that the new position on the continuum of allowable player interaction is objectively better or worse than the prior position - there are many games successfully occupying many positions on that continuum - it's that the position has changed, and those who found the old position acceptable may not find the new one as acceptable. There's always going to be people in the community pushing for a movement in either direction, and potential players waiting for a move toward a position they prefer; whether the positives outweigh the negatives on this move from a game health perspective is something I'm not qualified to address. I'm just trying to prove that the move exists and is nontrivial.

Forts are best because they do psi damage and punch through Unstop.
NWs are best because they have faster Mind Link and do -regen with their claws.
Crabs are best because they toss venom grenades and AoE and have good resistances.
I don't play Banes, but they're probably best because they have venom grenades too plus they lay the smack down on ST.

In conclusion, pick whatever flavor, they're all tasty.

This seems a bit convoluted and roundabout. Why not just add a button that lets you switch between the recipe and the crafted item in one step?

For a given power, damage scale is on a fixed ratio with endurance cost and recharge. Actual damage is then determined by damage scale and AT modifiers. Defenders spend the same amount of endurance to do less damage with the same power, because their AT mod for damage is lower. In general, the AT mods determine effectiveness of powers, but the cost is fixed across all ATs.

Occasionally I look at the differential between the price of a recipe and its corresponding crafted item, and realize for the umpteenth time that running missions is a sucker's game in terms of making money.

Of course I still do it, because I like running missions. But I'm not kidding myself about the economic efficacy.

Briefly, I think the difference between what the game does and what players do is that the developers have an investment in my continued enjoyment of the game, and I as a player can stop paying money for their product if it fails to entertain me. Even though the developers have no direct control over my fellow players, if they intercede with my experience to make it unenjoyable, it is the developers who will suffer the loss.

I am fully aware that it is unfair to blame the developers for the actions of the players. However, regardless of where the blame actually lies, people can't be expected to continue paying for a game that they do not enjoy, even if it is their fellow players who are the proximate cause of the lack of enjoyment. In a just world, people would be responsible for their actions, but in an MMO, the developers are punished for the actions of players. Their only recourse is to make such actions impossible.

Edited to add: That said, I see your point about drawing the line. Some interactions are going to be ambiguous if they are allowed at all, and cutting off every interaction that can be ambiguous is going to leave you with not a whole heck of a lot.

No apology is necessary.

Radio missions don't cause stupidity. In fact, they're probably the smartest way to get right to running missions, since every other way is, as you aptly described, more convoluted. It is rather unfortunate that the easiest and most convenient path to gameplay is also the one that offers the least interesting gameplay, but that's hardly the fault of the players.

I also have some doubts about citing familiarity with the poorly designed legacy systems of a pretendy fun time game as proof of intelligence.