Rudra

I've tried reading some bios that I just had to give up on. And I love reading character bios in the game. However, what you are mentioning seems uncomfortably common. A solid wall of text consisting of misspelled words, wrong word choices, and absolutely no periods or other end punctuation until the very end. (Normally, if I see errors in a bio, I will reach out to the person to give advice. When it is that bad though? All I can do is walk away.) On the previous thread asking for this, I was most definitely in favor. The 1023 character limit can be difficult to write bios for some of my characters. (Note that for some of my characters the bio is a poem, for others it may be a poem with text clarification, it may be a short story format, it may be a bullet style overview, or it may be a more traditional summary or note.) However, the previous thread requesting this has me in agreement with the no votes. Some of the stories players are trying to write are just too long. (And this is from someone that tends to use the full or nearly full character limit.) So, sorry, but I'm a no vote this time.

Yeah, I admit I was a bit... saucy... when I first wrote up the yes option. Sorry. I was asked to do a poll, so I am doing one. And if something should only be posted if the full player base is involved or should be disregarded because the forums are such a small portion of the player base, then we may as well shut down the Suggestions and Feedback forum.

Is that better? And what choice is missing? I'll add it. Edit: Does the change for yes work better for you?

This part I completely disagree with. We used to have missions that required players to team up to accomplish. And they either got skipped or auto-completed. Forcing players to have to team up for basic missions and story arcs is something I have always disagreed with. If players want to team for basic missions and story arcs? They can. They should never be forced to for basic missions and story arcs though. And the whole 'you have to have the correct power/power set to even complete the mission' bit? Hells no.

It isn't even a bottom reason for it. The costume creator has nothing to do with whether players want to form teams or not. Having a random function in the costume creator is supposed to be that. Random. I don't understand why you expect sophistication in costume design from a randomly selected group of costume options. And if you think someone's costume doesn't make sense, then the only thing preventing you from asking what effect or concept that player is going for is you. (Though you shouldn't tell someone their costume doesn't make sense. It makes sense to them. You don't get to impose your standards on character appearance on others.) And if another player's costume is what is keeping you from reaching out to talk to that player? That is entirely on you. And you know this for a fact how? I've seen some costumes that I thought didn't make much sense, but they had a bio that explained it. I've seen other costumes that I thought didn't make sense and had no bios for me to try to figure out, but it isn't my character to play so who cares as long as that player enjoys it. I have a friend that makes the most outlandish costumes he can, costumes that you would probably say are not sophisticated and have no concept at all. He does have a concept though. And if asked, he happily explains why his character is such a mishmash of parts. (Sometimes it is theme, and other times it is to make people go "Oh god no!!! My mind! What are you doing?!". His words, not mine.) I don't know if any costume pieces are weighted for the random function in the character creator, though it does often seem that way. So if any costume parts are weighted? I agree that they shouldn't be. Your complaint about others costumes not making sense and the random costume function should be changed to address that and make "sophisticated" character concepts? Well that part I just don't agree with.

Yes, I voted in my poll.

I was asked to do a poll to show the devs where people stand on patrol xp having an option to be disabled. So, here it is.

Turning off xp prevents me from acquiring xp from enemies and missions. (I do use it. Rather frequently so I don't outlevel the content at my current level range with the character I am playing at the time.) Turning off xp does not prevent me from acquiring patrol xp. Nothing does. And out of my nominal hour of play time, that is a half hour of just spawning into a PvP zone from my base to just die and not actually play. I would like to spend my hour playing and not committing suicide repeatedly to be able to play. I appreciate that you try to support me in many situations. I also understand that you cannot in this case. It doesn't change my stance on patrol xp though. Sorry. The whole point of this thread was to just give some (negative) feedback on an implemented change I do not like. It was not my intent to delve back into the "let me not accrue patrol xp!" debate again. For at least the 4th time on this forum. (Which is why I specifically stated in the OP that I am not asking for a reversion or making a suggestion.) And while I understand where you are coming from with the poll, I am not aware of any forum poll giving the devs any more of an incentive to consider what a player is saying on the forums than just making another non-poll thread. All I am doing, or at least was trying to do, was give my voice in feedback with no expectation of anything changing. Call it venting, I don't care. You know what? Fine. I'll make the poll. It won't change a thing and goes well beyond what I wanted to do with this thread, but I'll make it.

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/getting-started/

You can use debt to get rid of patrol xp by using the patrol xp to pay off the debt rather than level with it, but nothing cancels patrol xp. To the best of my knowledge, using the x2 xp buff from START (formerly P2W) stacks with patrol xp. And that was the question I was answering.

What I see is in the attached snip. Note that I do have an assets folder, which is the mods folder that has vidiotmaps. I don't know what @AspieAnarchy sees on their computer, but you apparently do have a data directory. (Edit: I on the other hand do not and am wondering why the difference.) Edit again: And to verify/validate files using Tequila, you click the Options button and then the Re-Validate button on the options window.

Yeah, this is an old bug dating all the way back to when the VEATs were launched. I don't remember why it happens, but basically if your SoA ever goes Crab (or slots the backpack) for any reason, and you decide to make another build that isn't a Crab or you just respec completely out of being a Crab, you're still a Crab as far as your costume goes. (Edit: In all costume slots. I think it is because your character has a Crab Spider power linked to it and you have to have the backpack for the animations to work.)

Nothing cancels patrol xp. And while I'm not certain, I believe they stack. (To an extent.)

It is optional. Options Improvements Power recharge timers now default to on (Center). The power tray timer defaults to shown for powers with an estimated recharge of longer than 15 seconds. This can be changed in the options menu, or a custom value may be set using the /recharge_timer_threshold command. Icons of recharging powers no longer shrink when the recharge timer is enabled, to make them easier to see behind the number. Veterans used to the old behavior can override this with /tray_always_shrink 1. New settings added to control power tray animations and add more customization options (format options, color coding, opacity) for the recharge timer. Edit: If you don't know where to look, attached is a screen shot:

I'm with @AspieAnarchy on this. What data directory? In the root folder for the game, I see a Costumes, piggs, missions, and logs folders; and I see a maps folder under the player account folder, but not a data directory folder unto itself. (Edit: And the 2 hc-bins folders too....)

Welcome. Don't feel bad though. I had to go to City of Data and search through all 11 armors to find it. So that's 3 out of 11 armors with click mez protection. (Edit: Which I guess goes to show differences in lines in the sand, since I don't consider 3 to be "many".)

I don't know what was bizarre about what I said, and I'm pretty sure this is just an excuse to avoid having to substantiate your arguments. But sure, more power to you.

Shield Defense.

Your arguments are getting more and more bizarre. I'm tired of this rabbit hole. My opinion is more autocast is bad, and I'm leaving it at that.

And the purpose of countering that argument is to argue against the implementation of this suggestion, so yes, you are absolutely using it as such. You are saying there's no reason to implement this suggestion because a proper implementation will be just as janky and unpredictable as the hacky way players currently replicate this functionality. This is a patently bad faith argument in the first place, because it assumes the devs are too incompetent to implement the feature without bugs, or to fix any bugs that emerge. Keep reaching. Because as my quote of myself shows, that is not what I was saying. At all. Then you should have no problem with multiple autocasts so long as they're restricted from being used on powers that affect enemies, as has already been suggested. I am less opposed to that, but am still opposed to it. Why? Because I am against making this game like an idler game. The more things we make auto, the less involved the player is in playing the game. Then the game itself is gated because we have to go looking for it instead of it just loading itself for us. And the place where it is located to be found and installed from? Are these forums. So they are already coming to these forums, where there is a plethora of additional information to help them get along in the game, as well as the wiki. So your gating argument falls apart. Then why are you binding powers to things like strafing or moving backward if you know you aren't going to always be strafing or moving backward? That definitely sounds like a you problem.

"We can't implement this because the implementation might not work" isn't a compelling argument for reasons that should be obvious, but we're also talking about very different degrees of janky and unpredictable here. I'm not using it as such. I'm using it solely to counter your argument that the current method of using binds is janky and unpredictable. My stance on not allowing players to set multiple powers to autocast is strictly based on not making it easier to farm and not turning the game into an auto-playing idler.

Not me, sorry. As proof, in the Robotic Arms 2 bug thread, I logged in, made 3 characters, and took screen shots of them just a little bit ago. (Edit: In case something changed between then and now, I just tried logging in again. And even with Pathfinder: Kingmaker still running, I was able to load up and access City of Heroes without any problems.)

Do you really think that if the devs were to for some reason agree to implement multiple power autocasting, it wouldn't also be janky and unpredictable? Seriously? In a game where just tabbing between targets will sometimes fail?

So the game had better be designed around being able to autocast as many powers as you want? Here's a dumb question: If we can already autocast as many powers as we want, just with binds, then why not just do that? No need for the devs to spend time coding something new that can already be done, right? If the means to autocast everything already exists, then what is the issue with us disagreeing with yet more means to make the game play itself?

Try re-validating your files. I just checked for all 3 body types, and with Robotic Arm 2, and I can still assign any back detail I want.