Rudra

I opened the OP acknowledging that the player base that may be affected by this may only be me. I understand that would not be justification to do this and accept that this is not likely to happen. As @Akisan pointed out though, there are other players that would like to be able to turn off patrol xp as well, just for different reasons. The frustration is the dug in stances of individuals trying to find a reason to disagree with this. That it may not be the best use of dev time is an argument I was prepared for and willing to accept. That the Live devs didn't conceive that anyone would have any problems with having yet more xp shoved down their throat and so further spaghettified the code making this change less than practical or feasible was another death knell I was prepared to hear. The hypocrisy of some of the arguments against the OP however? Let's start with a "fun" response. "Just put a piece of tape over it until it goes away." The player's character is always in the center of the screen. So if players are unhappy with a power's visual FX on their character, why not just put a piece of tape over it? Voila! No more power FX to bother that player. Or maybe that player shouldn't use that power. Or that power set. All three responses are equally nonsense. Players are free to play what they want. And you can't just put a piece of tape or other obstruction because now you are blocking the screen and reducing their ability to even play. (And how is the player, in this case me, supposed to know when it has gone away if that part of the screen is obstructed from view anyway?) Some of the comments boil down to "just deal with it". Again with powers and their visual FX, why not tell them to "just deal with it" as well? After all, unlike with patrol xp, if that player disables the visual FX of a power, it only applies to that player's character. Other characters using the same power will have that visual FX going. Because the player does not like it on his/her character? Well, that's a weird reason, so no. (Hint: It's not a weird reason. It is a personal one.) And yet, the forums are mostly fine with requests to minimize or do away with power visual FX as an option. And it is something every player in the character's vicinity can see and thus be "affected" by. As opposed to something that only the player in question can see such as patrol xp. Or how about comments posing incredulity at the thought of the request asking if I am fine with other day job powers? Here is the thing. I and a few friends I know all avoid day job locations after we get the badges for them. We don't want the day job powers/effects. So we avoid them. Except there is no way to avoid patrol xp from the Patroller day job. Because the Patroller day job is literally everywhere in the game. There are only two ways to avoid it. The first way is to always be logged in on that character. Which cannot be done if you have two or more characters. So that isn't an option. The second is to remove the character. From the game. To be added back in to be played later with no loss of levels or starting over. That's even less possible than the first way. So there is absolutely no way to avoid patrol xp. The character that prompted the OP was a level 44 Blaster who had all defensive toggles turned off and jumped into a group of all purple mobs. Your suggestion here has an 11 level gap. Can't get into the Hive and Eden isn't a threat. And with all level 48 CoT mobs including a boss attacking my level 44 Blaster with no active defenses or bonus HP from enhancements or enhancement set bonuses, and with that spawn being almost at the base portal allowing me to immediately jump back into the group over and over, it took 52 minutes to get rid of patrol xp. The ability to turn off xp doesn't bother the people responding on this thread. It boggles their mind to ask to be able to turn off patrol xp though. Why? What is the difference? They are both xp. Why is one okay to turn off but not the other? I would be perfectly fine if patrol xp was tied into the option to turn xp off and on. It makes logging my characters on and off a 2-step process instead of 1. That's fine. Great even. I'd be fine with a contact or object that I can turn over all my patrol xp to for absolutely no gain. I would be fine with a bought single use power from P2W or others that obliterated all currently gained patrol xp on a character. I'll make sure I have the funds to buy it each time for all my characters. I'm fine with pretty much every provided solution that isn't "deal with it", "suck it up", or just plain "no". I can accept those responses, they are inevitable. It is the hypocrisy of those posters that frustrates me. The root oppositon to the OP seems to be because the OP does not benefit some people, so it shouldn't provide benefit to others either.

One thing I find... interesting... since I made this thread, is the hypocrisy. "This power's visual FX bothers me. Can I have the option to turn it off?" "Yes! Great! More options is better!" "Patrol XP bothers me. Can I have the option to turn it off?" "That's a weird reason. No. Get over it." It's like turning off general xp is okay, but how dare someone ask to be able to turn off patrol xp.

No, it doesn't, because the bars are still there. If you had actually read the thread instead of skimming, you would have seen that was part of the problem and your solution had already been presented and told it did not help. Otherwise, I would already just be doing that.

The page you linked does recommend the other version, and you would think that the "local" version would be the one to only append to the local/character name rather than the global. At least it made sense to me for it work better that way.

Tried it again as /playernote instead of /playernotelocal. It does work that way. The linked page says the /playernotelocal command is the better of the two, doing everything the base command does and more, but it apparently doesn't. It apparently has to be the /playernote command with the character's name to work as you said.

I tried it. I used the /playernotelocal command with my current character's name and typed in gibberish. Then I exited and loaded a different character, typed in /playernotelocal with that character's name, and it opened the window with the gibberish preloaded. Deleted the gibberish and swapped back to the first character, typed /playernotelocal with that character's name again, and the window was empty.

Agreed with @Vanden. If player name colors are to be worked on, I think being able to pick your name color would be far better than hoping to get the color you want.

In the mission from Lars Hansen to take down 3 Council turrets, it took 4 turrets to clear the mission. The 1st turret didn't count. And I was at the turret when I took it down.

No good. It can be used to append notes to yourself, yes, but they are against your global. Even if you use /playernotelocal, the notes are against your global and not that character. And with no search function to find the notes for the character in question, that would be even more tedious than alt-tabbing to another program to check notes on your characters. At least in the other program, you can quick search for your character for relevant notes.

I don't see a high need for this, but there is definitely a benefit to it. It would be simpler to look up key details about a character this way rather than having to alt-tab to a word processor or spreadsheet to look up the character's notes, then alt-tab back to the game to resume whatever interaction you are doing with the character. You could track various quirks about the character, character-to-character hostilities and alliances, or even just keep track of the differences in character nature between similar characters you may be playing. This wouldn't really matter to non-roleplayers that much, or at least, not as much, but it also doesn't create anything that would affect anyone else's ability to play and enjoy the game however they want.

If I understand the lore right, they are the second tranche of Battalion's scouts. The apparent hostility between the shivans and new shivans is one of replacement and perceived failure, as best I can tell.

Then go find and read the post yourself. The devs didn't say it would never happen, just that as the game currently works, it is not feasible without extreme amounts of clipping. Which was shown in the post.

I never liked the poison set when I tried it, but I have friends that swear by it over the other support sets. So I'm kind of split on the OP. On the one hand, I would like to see poison as a set I can enjoy, but on the other, I don't want to take away something my friends really enjoy.

The AH requires a posting cost which is a fraction of the listed price and takes a payment fee from the buyer which is a fraction of the funds spent. That is inf' on both sides that is gone forever. That counts as a sink. And it still deprives the lucky player that got the respec recipe drop from getting inf' from it, exacerbating their lack of funds by denying them the ability to get more from that source. (Edit: And no, they would not 'not be able to sell for as much any more'. They would not be able to sell because everyone with even half a brain will just go get the freespec from P2W.)

Not true. If respecs are available free anywhere, then the player selling respecs is not likely to get anything. Why should anyone pay that player through the AH for a respec when that same person can just go get the unlimited freespec?

Not going to happen. At least, I'm pretty sure it will not happen. There is no reason to prohibit a level 50 character from having access to something because (s)he/it got all the way to level 50. You can't gate keep something like a respec's accessibility because the character "had time to experiment as much as they wanted and truly be at a point where they can spend 1mil influence like it's nothing." If it were to be implemented, you would see the forums light up demanding 50s get equal access. And those individuals would be right.

I very rarely respec. If I can solo the content, I'm doing fine. That said? A quality of life improvement I would like to see but am fairly sure will never happen? Is power trays retaining their settings for powers not replaced during a respec. Trying to rebuild the power trays after a respec is just oh so annoying. Especially on a fully incarnated 50 with trays of saved temp powers for times when they are needed. At least let me lock my temp power trays maybe?

There is nothing in this comment about AE farming, base building, roleplaying, or anything other than grinding out a few million inf'. Which as you said, you were doing in AE. (Edit: So your response could have been that that was what you were already doing instead.) So you are involving game aspects that have nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Defend yourself from comments, by all means. When someone makes a personal comment, deal with it. However, your response was wide ranging over fields that had nothing to do with the comment. Edit: And my perfect timing strikes again. Apologies @WumpusRat, this comment is not for you. And apologies to others for not linking what this comment was about. This is in response to @No Characteristic's comment 2 posts up.

You are. And using the test server is not part of the culture. I have no presence on the test server. I test my characters as part of playing them through the content. No one is saying you have to use the test server, just that using it to test builds and concepts is a viable option and would reduce the need for constant respecs. Misrepresented point. Base building has nothing to do with the discussion or anyone else's point. (Besides, base building takes a LOT of work.) Misrepresented point. AE farming, and other farms, are not part of the discussion. Though they are viable sources of inf' for respec recipes. Misrepresented point. Noone is saying anything about roleplaying or roleplayers in this thread.

Your comment didn't read as a joke. It read as a defense. Text has no body language or tonal indicators of jest. So if you don't include them, they are likely going to be read as not a joke. And the readers of this thread will have no idea how you slot your characters. Nor is how you slot your characters particularly relevant to the discussion. I did not accuse you, @No Characteristic, of being a min-max player. I stated that your defense was devolving into a min-max presentation. I was trying to help you with your presentation, but you seem to think I am attacking you.

No. Being level 50 is not min-max. It is max level (not counting veteran levels.) Min-Max refers to the playstyle of eking out every last bit of power, utility, or effectiveness/efficiency from a character. You can min-max at level 1. Not so much in CoX where powers are limited, but in many games. In CoX, you can start min-maxing as early as level 10. Maybe even earlier. It is a question of when you start trying to maximize your character, not what level your character is.

Honestly, I was fine with the OP. Until the author started posting some of his/her defenses. From the way this discussion is going, this is sounding less like a QoL thing, and more like a min-maxer thing. Look, @No Characteristic. If you want more readily available respecs despite the availability of them as already posted? That's fine. You made the suggestion. If the devs like it? They'll do it. However, you have to expect people are going to respond to the suggestion. Some may even disagree with it. You have to be open to that sort of feedback as well. Not just positive feedback. That's the point of feedback. Different people have different points of view and they will bring them up. Especially if there is already a method in the game to accomplish something being asked for. One thing to bear in mind with this suggestion though? Is your presentation. Your arguments are devolving away from quality of life concerns to how to max out your character's efficiency, or effectiveness, or power. And the game does not call for maxed out efficiency, effectiveness, or power. If you want to keep others viewing this as a quality of life thing, then you need to focus on the quality of life aspect rather than the concern of how a single enhancement slot may not be as well placed for character efficiency, effectiveness, or power than anticipated.

This already happens. I think every 10 levels. And they stack. To be clear, I don't actually oppose the OP. I don't care about it either way. I'm just saying that in the 1st response, there is already a way to test out your builds. Even on a team. And in this response, you are asking for a more limited version of something that already happens.

They can also just make a test server account and test builds there. Automatic 50, free enhancements. Build and test away. (Edit: Just join a team. No one else on the server? Ask your friends to pop over to the test server to help you test your build in a team environment.)

You just know all those numbers are going to have to be changed to all be the same as whatever power has the highest number too. For fairness.