Rudra

Works for me. Since it isn't the roundel itself, just a smaller standard 2-color chest emblem that can be used with another costume piece to mimic the roundel, it at least lets others that want the same thing to show different nationalities do so as well.

I could see that, except that all letters of the alphabet are represented for our costumes. Whereas the OP is only providing the British roundel. That isn't equal representation. That is a hard limit on what nations characters can base themselves on. You want a nice big <insert letter of choice> on your chest to show who you are? Go for it! You want a nice roundel to mark your national affiliation or other purpose? Go for it as long as it is of British origin. There's the equivalency. Now, I haven't tried what @Greycat mentioned, so while I'm fine with a basic roundel robbed of other marks like @srmalloy described since you would still get to portray the country's colors, I don't yet know if it actually can be done. So I'm not arguing against the OP, I'm just pointing out that your comparison is a false equivalency because we do have all the letters of the alphabet, but the OP would only make a single country's roundel available. Edit: In my book, there is a distinct difference between creatively creating a nation's roundel using existing options as opposed to having an actual roundel provided, but only for a single country. If roundels are to be made available, then all country roundels should be made available. Including their emblems on the roundel as appropriate for any given roundel.

No one said you shouldn't bother imagining things. Imagine up the world, propose whatever you like. What was said was that limiting badges by AT takes away form other players' fun and desires, including their character concepts. Why should my character have to be a Controller to get the Control Freak badge? Other ATs also get controls, and even characters without a single control power can be a control freak, something the player may be proud of and want to announce. Especially if the character can manage battlefield control without actual control powers. There is also the consideration that there are players that collect badges like a magpie collecting shinies. And it is extremely frustrating to see a badge and know you can never get it on that character, let alone 12 more badges that you will never be able to get on the character. Collecting badges is fun in its own right, and having badges in the game that can't be acquired steps on that fun too. From a personal point of view, it's like giving players like me the middle finger. "Behold all these new badges! You want them, don't you? Well, guess what? YOU CAN'T HAVE THEM! AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!" All specific AT teams can be a lot of fun, yes. No one is arguing against that. See my first response in this post for what is actually being said.

I am not buying this because it seems like suggesting the letter and number symbols shouldn't be available because other fonts could have been used instead. False equivalency. We do have all the letters and we do have all the numbers from 0-9. (Multi-digit numbers seem to be a problem.) So for this comparison, what @srmalloy said is correct. It would require all available roundels to be treated the same. (I'm not particularly sold on this argument because we don't have every type of lion head or other symbols, so a basic roundel with no other emblem on it would be fine in my book. [Edit: Then again, as @Greycat pointed out, we pretty much already do have access to a basic roundel.]) Your argument about us not having different fonts for the letters/numbers would be akin to saying the we would need different sizes of roundel. Not the different available roundels from all nations that use them instead of only making a single nation's roundel available, thereby only allowing a single nation's supers to get to have their roundel for use.

No clue. Good question. Foot Stomp says yes, it can. (Edit: So does Lightning Rod, which used to require you to be on the ground, but now just requires you to be near it.)

I 'love' how when anyone disagrees with a suggestion, it is because they 'hate fun'. It's never because of any of the reasons actually given, it is always because anyone who disagrees obviously hates fun.

Here's the problem with that logic - you never have to reload your firearms, replenish your arrows, can use fire attacks while in the water, and so on. If we're going for realism, then do so across the board and more consistently, If not, then let players use their powers freely... I subscribe to the Hollywood/Anime school of video game logic. For simplicity, firearms have infinite ammo. Thermal weapons and fire attacks aren't hindered by the presence of water. Electrical attacks/lightning still shoots straight instead of dispersing in water. Causing the ground to shake to harm my foes requires them to at least be near the ground. There is only so much I can suspend disbelief for before I just throw my hands up and say 'this is pure nonsense'. (Edit: Note that being able to hover off the ground and use things like Foot Stomp is fine with me. You are still near the ground and the upheaval could theoretically affect foes also hovering near the ground. Like I said though, making the ground shake and rumble to hurt my foes fighting me 100 feet in the air goes well beyond suspension of disbelief.) (Edit again: Also, please note the differences in what I posted. Firearms having infinite ammo for instance. They have the ammo they need to function, they just don't run out. Thermal weapons and fire attacks working normally underwater. The attack source is still capable of generating the thermal/fire attack, it has the ability to function. It however, disregards being underwater as completely shutting down the ability. The electrical/lightning attack not being dispersed underwater. The source is still functional, it is capable of producing the attack on its own, but the added hindrance of being underwater is ignored. Using an earth tremor attack to affect something not even near the earth however, is lacking its attack source: the ground. It isn't that the attack is an earth-based attack being done in mid-air. Earth blast attacks are fine because the character is the source of the power. It is that is a ground-based attack, and being mid-air takes away its primary source: the ground.)

I'm more in favor of @TheZag's OP. Some attacks just make sense for the character or target to be on the ground to use. There should be some leeway for it though, like with Foot Stomp. As long as you are hovering at the ground, you can use it. Works for me. I love that change. Taking away that restriction though? Could mean my foot stomping brute can hover 100 feet above the ground and still stomp it to cause a harmful tremor.* The addition of "wiggle room" to abilities that require the user or the target to be on the ground would fix the problem @TheZag described, where you go to use such a power because you obviously can, but the game tells you that you can't because reasons. The target somehow isn't actually on the ground despite him/her standing on a slope. You're somehow not on the ground because you are standing on a slope. Other silly glitches. (Targets jumping and evading the ground-based attack though? I'm fine with them doing that. Just means my timing sucked at the time.) I'm all for the OP. Not so much about just taking the requirement away though. Edit: * - If my character is surrounded by flying foes 100 feet in the air, I shouldn't be able to blast them with an earth tremor attack like Foot Stomp since there is no ground anywhere near us for it to work on. If I'm fighting in the water and do that? Then I'm standing on a sand bar, a shallow reef, or similar.

No, there aren't. First GM is Deathsurge in Cap. Then Scrapyard in Shark, Caleb in Nerva, and the Arachnos Flier in GV. St. Martial has an event instead.

So you want to be completely invisible to other players that don't have enough perception to see you in PvE? Gonna make it hard for PBAoE healers like my MM to heal you....

You beat me to it. 13 new badges, but you can only ever get 1 of them? From a personal point of view, that sucks....

Oh? So a character that's a Hero can just go to Arbiter Rein and run a patron arc? Or join the last mission of someone else's arc? They can't access the zone. If they could, like Vigilantes can, then yeah, they probably could join someone's mission and unlock the patron pools like Vigilantes do. (Edit: Unlike the Praetorian zones that anyone can access.)

What happens to a villain who get a patron pool and then change alignment to Hero? There is a difference though. Patron pools can be unlocked by any character. All that is required is to do the specific unlock mission at the end of the 1st arc from the patron. So you can start hero, go rogue/villain, and get a patron; start hero, go vigilante, and tag along on said mission; or be a rogue or villain and unlock those pools by doing the patron arc. Your proposal as is would lock out anyone that is not currently a Praetorian alignment since it is impossible to become a Loyalist or Resistance past level 20, or at all if you don't start gold side. There is also the consideration that no character can have more than one alignment at a time. Even the Praetorians. So either you are a Loyalist or you are Resistance. Which alignment you start as unlocks access to a specific contact that can modify specific missions, but otherwise, no character is both Loyalist and Resistance. The game does not track multiple alignments per character. This is evident in a character's inability to use Resistance doors after going Loyalist even if they started as Resistance, and vice versa for going Resistance, until they change their alignment to again be the correct one to use the correct doors. So dumb question, as in I'm pretty sure I know the answer, but how would a character be both alignments to access both sets of pools?

Except if the leader has you on ignore, you will never get on the team anyway. And if you have the team leader on ignore, you will never even know the leader is forming a team to even request an invite in the first place. Both circumstances already resolve themselves in the game and aren't really covered by the OP. So the only real consideration for the OP is if a team member has the person on ignore or if that person has a team member on ignore. And if a player has another player on ignore, they won't be seeing the ignored person's comments anyway and can focus on what the leader and possibly other members are saying. Or if the other person has the player on ignore, there won't be any interaction between them because the other person can't see the player's comments. So... not to bash the OP... but I don't understand it. (It feels like the author is looking to punish himself/herself/themselves by limiting the number of teams (s)he can join.) From a strictly personal point of view, if I'm being ignored by someone on the team or league, I don't really care. That person's lack of interaction with me can be the result of several different things, all of which is their business rather than mine. I can still enjoy interacting with the rest of team even if one person on the team isn't interacting with me. And if I have someone on ignore? I can't see their comments anyway, so unless that person goes out of their way to use their powers to annoy me, which would be evident to the rest of the team, who cares? Though I understand I tend to have a weird outlook on things.

if you mean taunt exists as a power you can select, like scrapper confront, or say stalker placate - yes.

I'm worried about the Placate comment. Like maybe that is next on their agenda. I take it on all my Stalkers. It keeps me alive until I can finish developing the character. Sometimes even in high level missions after full development. First Confront, now Taunt, next Placate?!

@honoroit, you posted proof of @Greycat's comment. The only builds I see being spread are the min-max builds that abandon everything that isn't damage, self-protection, or a means of improving at least one of those. Those builds may be popular for the current meta, but they aren't by any means indicative of Taunt not being part of players' builds. It just isn't a current meta build.

https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/First_Ward https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/Night_Ward The Praetorian story line goes out to level 35. It's just that starting at level 20, it is not limited to Praetorian characters for accessibility. (Edit: And as a gold side player, you also need to know you can just go there and do arcs instead of going directly to Primal Earth.) (Edit again: First Ward even has a Loyalist contact that seemingly reports directly to Tyrant. She always has missions to give players until they out-level the zone. She just has no arcs.)

I really like the idea behind this, lore-wise, but mechanically it'd lock almost everyone out of those pools (very few people are still gold when patron pools unlock, and you can't get back in once you leave). As well as completely prohibiting non-gold characters from accessing it, making it more restrictive than red side patron pools which anyone can get as long as they do the 1 unlock mission at the end of the first arc.

I don't typically play Tankers, but every Tanker I've teamed with had Taunt and used it. In some cases, rather frequently. Either to corral enemies, pull them off my or my friends' butts, or to pull spawns out of heavily populated rooms so our ranged characters aren't eating spawn alphas trying to snipe lure spawns over to us. So from my experience, it is rather prolific. If you have hard data proving otherwise, please supply it. Otherwise your statement is purely anecdotal, just like my counter-point. And from a game balance perspective, I don't see the OP being implemented without Taunt losing current features to compensate. I'm willing to bet that if the OP were to be implemented, Taunt would no longer be auto-hit but instead get the base 75% chance to hit an equal level target, could be avoided by the target's psi' defense, cost 8-15 END, get a longer recharge, and would do the same damage modified by the target's psi resist regardless of what target it was used against. Which would make several players I know unhappy because they actually take and use Taunt. (Edit: I'm probably back on your ignore list, so you aren't going to see this response, are you?)

The difference between taunt as is at target cap and taunt as changed by the OP at target cap? As is doesn't break soft mezzes, but the OP does. So the likelihood of loose mobs going after allies you don't want them to? Goes up. Edit: Also, slotting the damage proc into Taunt? Is a player choice about how (s)he wants their taunt to work. The OP takes that choice choice away and makes it mandatory.

1) Tankers and Brutes are the only ATs with 400 threat ratings. Scrappers come in 2nd at 300. All other ATs are 200 or 100. 2) Any AoE can already do this. So why should Taunt need to fill this role? 3) Taunts are already attractive picks for anyone that has a desire to keep mobs off their squishier allies or even pull groups out of hazardous areas. 4) I have no idea what you mean by this. So my question becomes, how is the OP needed enablement? And I still have my previous questions such as: What about the loss of utility, from having taunts do their own damage even without the proc, thus breaking soft mezzes like sleeps? Why should an attack do more damage to higher tier foes than lower tier ones, taking away the advantage higher tier foes have in survivability compared to lower tier enemies? Why there should be a new damage type added to the game that increases based on having non-damage enhancements slotted? Would the proposed illusion damage be subject to psi' damage resist and defense, need new DEF/RES created, or would it be unresistable for being non-standard damage? What about the 0 END cost for what is now an AoE attack instead of a non-damaging tool to pull targets off allies or just to pull them to you? What other changes would be needed to balance out the proposal, like making all taunts now have a to hit check to see if it connects, taking away another advantage of taunts? What about the aggro cap that you mentioned, especially after you consider that soft mezzes will now be broken by taunts? Why Tankers/Brutes would even need yet more damage sources in their power sets than they already get from their power sets? If also applied to "punchvokes", why do their regular attacks need the extra damage boost automatically built in?

Thanks. I forgot about that. Someone asks to join a team/league, leader sends invite, and then gets a message that the requesting player can't be invited. Are they the wrong alignment for the task in question? (Like the Jade Spider TF/SF.) Is there someone already on the team/league that has that person on ignore? (Why should that even be a problem for the team leader, since that person is ostensibly the one giving everyone their directions?) Is the requesting player the one that has someone already on the team/league on ignore? (See team leader's involvement statement of point 2, and how does the requesting player find out? Do they just stand there wondering if the team/league leader is ignoring them because they can't be invited to the team/league?) Yeah, sounds like a major headache in the making.

People make mistakes. Bug reports have been filed on the Suggestions and Feedback forum. Website suggestions have been posted on the Suggestions and Feedback forum. (I'm guilty of having done this as well.) Edit: All anyone is asking is that you give enough information for the rest of us to be able to understand, rather than assume we share the same references as you.

Problem with that is if only a team member has you on ignore. If it is just one person, you can infer comments made by others' responses. And only whomever is directing the team's actions needs to be heard. On a league, this is much more pronounced. If you are put on Team 5 and the person that has you on ignore is on team 7, but you can see the posts from the league leader and the team leaders, what problem is being introduced if one member of team 7 says something you can't read? Why would you want to punish yourself and limit your options in this way?