Greycat

As far as the "forum game," as it was put - At least for me, no, it's not a "game," nor is it meant to show some sort of superiority or put someone down. The point of the forum is discussion - and that does mean also pointing out existing solutions to the problem being presented (assuming a "problem" is being addressed) or down sides with whatever the suggestion is, including if it's something unworkable. Yes, the person posting it should be prepared to defend their post. (Or abandon it if it's one of those "Oh. Wow, I didn't know that, yeah, that wouldn't work" or "I didn't know a solution already existed in game!" items.) This should not be used or seen as a personal attack on *either* side. It's hard to do sometimes, absolutely. We're not face to face, most of us don't personally know each other, so it's very easy to take something dashed off in a minute as being snarky or condescending or otherwise rude. (And yes, there *are* some posts that are just that. Let's be real.) You, the person making the suggestion, have put thought (I hope!) into the idea, it's something you think would be great, and suddenly you have a bunch of people telling you there are problems or it's not the greatest thing since sliced bread. It is, sometimes, hard not to feel attacked. The only advice I can give is back up, take a few breaths, and re-read what's getting you annoyed. And *do your best* to cut that off at the pass - whether that's asking (*politely!*) for clarification or even just saying "Look, the last three responses have been pretty much just snarky put downs, I'm not responding to you any longer." If you have to actually *put* the person on ignore for a day or two so you don't even see the posts, do that. But do your best to gauge intent, too. Back on live, I was known for "copypastas." I had responses for some fairly common suggestions (vehicle travel powers, for one.) Some people took them as attacks. The whole point of them, for me, was to say "OK, we've talked about this in the past. To summarize, here are what we know of as problems, here are some ways the idea hs been given in the past, here are what the devs have said if they've weighed in. So let's shortcut all that and see if there's something new we can do with it," primarily to avoid retreads and some things that would bring up arguments. Everyone had the same info, and occasionally they *would* be jumping off points for interesting discussions or new twists. Which was the point. But they were never meant to be "Your idea's stupid, and so are you," or "read the 10000 pages of the forum, noob!" Unfortunately, some people took them that way. *shrug* It's the danger of a text medium. All we can do is try our best to avoid misunderstandings.

Responding to some comments: I'm sure it'd be somewhat easier than completely reprogramming the game to use modern graphics, but slightly harder than fixing typos. I can't be more precise than that 🙂 Yes, I had "rarity" in mind there, too, I forgot to mention it. And yes, multiples of the same adds complexity - but, ,honestly, to me it's like IOs anyway. You can just slap a set in, or pick something that matches what you want ("eh, I don't really want to slot heavily, half ACC half DMG from that set works fine,") or you can go crazy plotting set bonuses and the like. And as someone else mentioned, I see these treated as regular commons as far as attuning. But I'm not the one you'd have to sell on the idea - the argument could, after all, be made that these have more of a "cost" to the user than a common IO (craft the frame, craft the IOs, eat the salvage and INF cost for all of that) so attuning "should" be allowed. I'm not set in stone either way. They absolutely would not skip ED. They are, at their heart, still "common" enhancements. Though, to me, it also gives a situation where someone doesn't want to "waste" part of a regular enhancement going over ED, so (with the regular split or the multiple of the same effect) they can go RIGHT up to the line, then add a little something else (say, a partial RECH IO.) Oh, I should note, these wouldn't take sets, so no making a dual with common DEF +LOTG global, or 2/3 DMG 1/3 Proc. (Part of the power concern.) Other than that, the potential complexity is part of what I think some people would like. By "No vendor buying," you're looking at merits? Or regular stores? We can't buy common IO recipies at regular stores as it is, and as far as merits... I have no idea what they would be priced at if they *were* there. I think, power wise, these would walk the line between "standard" IOs and sets - other than experimental builds, I don't think someone would put them in (say) half their build, but would sprinkle them about to differentiate themselves a bit. Oh! Yes, they also would not "add" effects. I don't think I mentioned that. For example, the Taunt/DMG I mentioned. THey'd act like HOs - the Taunt part would work but you wouldn't suddenly get DMG added. However, if you put it in (say) Fiery Aura on a tank or brute, both components would work.

IOs give us a lot of flexibility in slotting. There are a lot of sets out there. But, there are some combinations that (as I recall) only exist in HOs, or don't exist at all. I'd propose creating a way to let players make them. What drops: "Frame" recipies. These give dual, triple or quad power categories for the player to fill out. (Similar to Acc/Dam, Acc/Dam/End, Acc/Dam/Rech/End.) What happens: A player crafts the frame. They then take whatever IOs they want and fill in what they're looking for. For instance, if they want a dmg/-tohit, they put one damage in and one tohit. Details: The frame controls the level. (Though I'm not set on this.) It controls the percentages of each "section," just like (say) an acc/dam has a certain percentage of accuracy and damage enhancement in one IO. I'm *thinking* the IO would have to be within 10 levels of whatever that "section" is... or above. For instance, a level 25 "two aspect" frame could use a level 15 IO and, if someone had one, a level 45. Yes, this means a quad aspect could use a lot of low level IOs (hey, reason to make those level 10s.) Empty or partially filled frames are not slottable. Why: Why not? 🙂 Might be interesting to see what people come up with. On top of having some things that don't exist as IO sets (for instance, Taunt/DMG, looking at Taunt sets, or maybe a Taunt/Stun,) players could play with percentages - I don't see this as being limited to "Must have one different effect type in each" (past the dual frames, because dam/dam would just be damage.) For instance, you could take a triple and make it damage/damage/def debuff. Or acc/acc/end, giving more of an acc buff with a touch of end reduction - something IO sets don't do. Some like that would probably have to be indicated differently, like "PIO (player IO) triple acc+/end" for someone doing an acc/acc/end. Would these be able to be put on the market? At the very least, the frames would, yes. They'd be recipies. Probably crafted empty frames as well. I'm not sure how much of a mess the market would be with the variety of what people could create being put on it, but I'm not against it. These would also be storeable and tradeable. Are these boostable/catalyzable? Like regular (common) IOs, no.

Just for general reference, from Paragonwiki - There are several Enhancement aspects that have been retired and combined into new ones. The currently known ones are: Cone Range, which was incorporated into the Range aspect; Endurance Drain, and Endurance Recovery, which were merged into the Endurance Modification aspect; Team Defense, and Self Defense, which were merged into the Defense Buff aspect

So you could also say you used it as seed money for getting into marketeering and the initial few characters you made?

So do you farm? "Just for the rewards" then, or just an outside observation? I should probably answer my own question here: 1. As mentioned, curiosity. I don't generally farm. (And if you watched me farming... I'm pretty sure the facepalms and "why are you doing that?" questions could be heard from COH to the other side of WOW.) 2. Rewards. I'd rather spend time and tickets getting rare salvage than buying it or hoping for drops. I can specify what I need and pick it right up. And, yes, dump the rest on the market.

This is it exactly.

Since I'm doing an "out of curiosity" LBFF at the moment (and for me it's experimental, seeing what I can do, similar to when I ran one of the CEBR brutes in late-live,) I thought I'd ask: How many of you farm because you enjoy the act of farming, and how many do it only for the rewards? (Inf / "this lets my SG run CCs" / "I can get people PL'd up.") Would you find yourself running farm maps if it weren't for farming bringing in the most INF? (There's also the "And why" here - is it just mowing down this many enemies, seeing what you can do to really optimize builds? Or all about that inf?) Or is it a balance between the two ("I do it for the inf, but I enjoy it and would probably run farms anyway, just less frequently" sort of thing?) *Pure* curiosity here. (Similar to badgers who don't like PVP going in to PVP zones to get those badges, versus those who enjoy the game and the badges are a plus - they'd find themselves in there at some point anyway even without badges.)

Thanks! (Yes, for those wondering, I now have an email with 1b inf waiting in it.)

... heh. Borrow an idea from some other games. P2W vendor "pet" that sells your salvage on demand. "Sell: [x] All common salvage at [100] inf."

@Therra Arcson (I'm not proud, I have alts to feed!)

Can I have a billion influence? 🙂

"Ignorantly low." That's a way to make friends and influence people. And no, I wouldn't be "red in the face with anger." This is a game. I treat it as such. I also try not to post ridiculous hypotheticals like "everyone will sell purples for 1 inf." Look through the market now. Things not in demand have a low selling price in their history. Things that *are* in demand have a high selling price. Why? Because someone else decides "No, I want to get this much at a minimum." Or another buyer decides "No, I really want that piece" and bids more. It's how the market works. Speaking of how the market works - from ParagonWiki (copied from the market "trainer") - If multiple players are selling an item for different amounts, the person with the lowest list price will sell first as long as a bid is higher than their list price. Thus, if a lot of people are listing an item for 100 inf, someone who lists the same item for 10,000 inf may never sell it even if people are paying 100,000 inf for it. Likewise, it's possible for someone who lists an item for 100 inf to sell it for 100,000 inf while someone else who lists the item for 10,000 inf only sells it for 10,000 inf. So, y'know, another reason to list low. By the way, I haven't "earned my fortune." I don't bother playing the market, for the most part. So your assumption there... well, you know what they say about assumptions.

Can you tell with those robes? (Some of the models *are* a bit more petit - and several of the ... er... non voluntary volunteers you can save are women, so....)

Nope.

I never meta alt I didn't like?

No. If you want to list it at that? Go crazy. If I want to dump stuff on the market for 1 inf? I should be allowed to. (I tend to do 6 inf, myself.) Why *shouldn't* someone be allowed to buy at "a steal?" Or sell for whatever they want?

You'll note it's not arguing against. Just stating that it's your INF you're throwing away. (Though, honestly, if I wanted to dump salvage easily, I'd prefer the "Autolist *rarity* salvage at *price*" as an option.Or a slash command I could throw into a macro.)

*shrug* It's your INF you're throwing away by wanting this. I'd prefer you get an option to auto-sell them, listed at 1 inf, and all the proceeds go to me.

Oh, if I didn't mention it... I disagree with removing that 5% - with very few exceptions. Why am I missing fires with extinguishers in Steel Canyon? Why am I missing boxes? I don't *think* we tend to miss objects in Mayhem missions. Those.. should really probably be just hittable.

... or on a MSR in the bowl phase. Maybe Hami. Other than that...

Felt like this bit needed to be responded to. The Incarnate System we see now, and related content, is incomplete. There was meant to be a second tier of powers (and XP, etc.) of which the only one we have is Hybrid (which, to me, works as an "Alpha 2.0.") We are missing Genesis, Mind, Vitae and Omega - even as far as descriptions. We also do not (I'm going to add in an editorial "fortunately" here) have the whole Battalion storyline, mobs, etc. So calling it bad design... I don't know. Calling it incomplete and potentially suffering from that? Yes. As far as the "remove level shifts?" Instead of deciding what everyone likes or doesn't or what benefits or doesn't benefit everyone, how about just a command. /removelevelshift. Or an option on the menu. That way you can play however you want without affecting everyone else. *shrug* Throw some badges in on top of it. Heck, add one for completing tinpex without alpha slotted.

*nitpick* at 20 you can get invisibility for the cost of running a patrol in Siren's, and refresh it up to 5x. Not permanent, granted, but it's been "enough" for a number of characters. Also don't forget mobs that can penetrate stealth (including Hide,) either with Tactics or just inherently (Rikti drones.)

A reward for getting to 50 and getting alpha slotted that far. Which, frankly, for all my gripes about the rest of the incarnate system, I'm fine with.

Yes, it did. Well back on live. Which is why they're orange now.