Greycat

With respect, this sounds like a mostly "you" issue. For your points: 1. Broadening the network. That's what friends lists (local and global) and coalitions are *for.* This is not something that would only suddenly unlock with having one character able to be in multiple SGs. 2. Again - coalition covers that. And your feedback feedback? 1. No, that is nothing close to what is being said. You have to fold, spindle and mutilate the argument to make it say anything close to "we do not need SGs." 2. Not if you make the alt another version of the same character. I've done this to play the same character on multiple servers, or play the same character at different points in their career, or, yes, to be in different groups. I've even had it be the same characters with or without certain powers in the same SG (warshade for one, dual pistols for another version, for instance.) All that said, I'm not necessarily *against* the idea, I just don't think it's all that needed - and shudder at what could be broken with trying to do it.

Yeah, I haven't been on COH much, much less the classics. (Among other things, preparing for a move, so...)

... Had to comment on this, because this is just not how I recall those days. Granted, I didn't get *into* those discussions much, because just like now I don't particularly care, but Arcanaville and others seemed to be quite willing to publicly share their (fairly tedious seeming) testing, both in methodology and result, while trying to ferret out numbers and mechanics before the curtain was pulled back. It was quite the opposite of elitist.

Bring back the cysts! It's disappointing, now, to be running (say) the later Kheld arcs, be told these are a huge threat, go into the mission and find... inert lumps of crystal.

I want a middle ground. Some things can be tied together in a grand plot that even some of the participants aren't aware of, being used by some other being or group, absolutely. There can, of course, be multiple of these, to a point, and of different scales. Mix in local plots of a group or individual that can be seen and stopped that have nothing to do with the big group's plot to TRY to TAKE OVER the WORLD! What I'd also like to see, frankly, are some older plot hooks (*cough*gadzul/BotBS*cough*) picked up, fleshed out and finished.

You *can* manually sort (drag and drop.) You can even edit the playerslots.txt file, but that can lead to its own issues (newer characters sometimes not appearing because the file's not being updated, etc.) Plus it's not allowing some of the other options people have requested.

I will admit the first time I saw that, I thought it looked like a wilted grenade.

Sunda flying lemurs.

Which is basically the same model (powers wise) as a PPD Awakened, yeah. (Well, the boss in that group.) You can't make one with both form shifts and pick and choose powers - or a Warshade. (Which is why I suspect NPC AI limitations.) Though, honestly, the only Kheld-related thing I really want is a contact NPC with the Nictus "cloud" look. (Or PB light form.) That, I don't know why it's missing.

Just as an aside - go to early, in-development prerelease interviews, and PVP was part of the plan from the start. It wasn't *introduced* until a few issues in (with the Arenas finally showing up,) but it was planned as part of the game. And as far as balance... to an incredible degree more than the rest of the game, "balance" in PVP really meant "go in with a team." After all, we're not just balancing 5 (or 7, or 12, or 16) archetypes, but the powerset combos *inside* those ATs can be vastly different. So, yeah. PVP's balance was "go with a team."

AE always lags behind live, sometimes drastically - even pre sunset. And some things just seem like they will not make it in there - I'm assuming because of things like AI/NPC limitations (for instance, there are no Kheldians available in the NPC creator. A few Awakened, but that's about it.)

Never claimed it was "the" answer. Just a suggestion. And it really depends on the people - both the player and the rest of the team. Some people just don't enjoy it at all.

From the description, expanded filters for the character list, it sounds like.

Which is why I specified "RP" as an answer. And mostly am on everlasting. Run with an RP SG or specify it's an RP team. Different experience.

*shrug* Options and/or concept.

Similar things have been asked for before and I *still* think it'd be a good idea. More sorting options (and tagging,) please!

I'd say Steampunkette pretty much has it. The Stealth in Dark - as well as Energy - is there for you to get close to (or right in the middle of) your enemies before eating an alpha. In some ways it's like lightning rod or shield charge. It's letting you almost guarantee that *you'll* be the one initiating combat, not the enemy. So, basically... to me, they *are* letting you set the terms of combat. They're letting you initiate, then with the powers breaking stealth, they're letting you hold attention as melee. Now, whether having specific powers (like Entropic Aura) have a taunt aura to them is good or not - different conversation. But as far as suppression while in stealth and what breaks it... yes, some powers, definitely, but I think it'd be a power by power discussion (I wouldn't *want* CoF Or OG to suppress, I want them working right away, for instance, and would see "suppress in stealth" as a bit of a nerf to them.)

Given this is one of my "I wish they'd limited it *there* to begin with" items (in the inevitable "what's breaking the game/making it too easy" threads) I'd frankly love to run with this. Just to see how big of a difference it makes. It'd likely have to be with a set group of people, but still.

Looks like a concrete barrier more than a block, with the angled sides. (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/3d-illustration-simple-concrete-barrier-icon-441826378 ) Closest thing I can figure. (Can't really think of any that throw me, so if someone wants to volunteer one...)

Yes, but do you know where that blue hand has been? You know what happens with the guards at the hazard zone entrances...

RP. If you're flying through missions, you're probably also talking, reacting and having fun. If you're struggling, you're reacting to *that* with others, too. Mechanically? *shrug* I don't worry about uberbuilds, so...

... well, technically they *do* have a chance of getting mezzed - if enough is stacked on them. (As I"m recalling, Ghost Widow used to be huge for this vs tanks. Mag100 hold, wasn't it?)

Thinking of the trams and ITF final mission doors as the big examples here?

The same trinity that is completely irrelevant in COH, you mean? The game that doesn't need a "holy trinity" (or any other combination, for that matter) for people to play perfectly fine? And no, that is not what "roleplaying" is generally accepted to mean, no matter how much you want to hold on to that. Those same games had you playing a role in the sense of an actor in a story, not "you give these numbers, you give these numbers." That was the *point.* And still is. Roleplaying goes *way* back. Kids playing cops and robbers, or dressing up? Guess what they're doing. Rudimentary role playing. The tabletop RPGs? What's the point of them? "You walk into a tavern..." and begin to *tell a story* with your characters... IE, roleplay. Edit: For that matter, I can roll up a fighter (the "role" you want to emphasize being the point) ... and never fight for tens, hundreds of roleplay sessions, instead using, say, my character's knowledge of an area, or their family's name and influence to help (or hinder) people, or their wealth, or their charisma (that has nothing to do with swinging a sword or holding a shield.) By your definition, I'm not "role playing" and am RPGing wrong. I'm not doing "my role." The adventure, in fact, has no "role" for me. Yet, I'm fairly sure every other roleplayer on earth would disagree with you, whether they're doing so with a group over mail, sitting around a table rolling dice and eating doritos, or playing a video game.

And they just put "playing" there because it's a game and you're supposed to play it, I suppose... not because *roleplaying,* in the sense of the forum section I just put there, was ever a thing dating back before and inspiring *roleplaying* video games. I suppose we're lucky they put "game" in there so we knew that's what it was and didn't confuse it with an awkward spreadsheet and wondered why we couldn't balance a checkbook on it. Again, no.