Rudra

The set already has Tornado to do that and why would a thunder clap summon a twister?

You heard the man, no more nice things ever. You thought you were playing a game? You thought you were here for fun? No, you're lucky we haven't made you suffer like we did back in the day when we leveled uphill, both ways! Sister Psyche in a fridge, man. Are y'all listening to yourselves? At least try to understand the argument you are arguing against. The comment you are quoting is not saying we can't ever get any more nice things ever again, it was a response to a comment that implied we don't already have any and never will because of opposition to various suggestions. (Edit: Though I do concede how that comment reads.)

So yeah, if you would have earned the badge but left before it could be applied, the game recovers to the last point it knew that character was at to start the clock towards the day job. Given notorious spaghetti code, that actually makes a lot of sense. (Edit: If there is one thing I know to do about badges, is to always wait until after they post on my screen as received before moving on or it doesn't get awarded. That goes for explore badges, day job badges, and any other badge I am going for.)

The hardest content, sure, but hard mode/advanced difficulty does not. Temps don't get disabled until at least 3 star difficulty. So @Sunsette's point is still valid. (Edit: I crafted an empowerment station buff and then started Hard Mode ITFs until the temp power was disabled by the game. At 1 or 2 stars, the buffs remain.)

The progress bar may disappear, but when you log off in that location again and then log back on after a while, is the bar starting over or has it progressed from previous? Edit: Watched the video. Okay. That's a bug, though I don't know why players trying for badges don't give the badge time to load. Best guess? The game was awarding the badge but you left while it was, disrupting the award. So the game auto-recovered as best it can, starting you over.

Yep, I've seen players do that too. We're smashing cables and some players are camping where Sands is going to appear emoting drinking coffee or any other emote. I've seen players do that on Lambda runs even after the trial leader told everyone not to because sometimes it causes Marauder to leap out past the gate and cause the trial to fail.

True, but by the same token, we were already doing that for iTrial launches. Though in those cases it was more humorous. I agree that there can be imposed consequences if the vote is not hidden or if the team or team leader try to ferret out the one that wants to see the cut scene for any reason, but right now @Saiyajinzoningen's proposal is the only one that gives possibility to the OP and retaining the ability to see the cut scenes. The only other option I can think of is that if the team leader goes to disable cut scenes, the game checks to see if anyone hasn't already done the TF/SF and overrides the disabling if anyone hasn't. Except that then leads to a poll of who hasn't already done the TF/SF with the newbie likely getting booted. So again, I ask, how can the OP be modified to accommodate both sides? Because I'm having a hard time thinking of one. Even if the cut scene only played for the person that hasn't seen it before, that person will still stand out and for the cut scene's duration, not be helping the team. Which can again lead to the person being kicked.

Short version/summary: Empowerment stations are available for free in any SG to build as well already available at the Crucible and Fort Trident. Empowerment stations grant a buff lasting 90 minutes (regardless of what the in game description says) for the cost of 1 common salvage, 2 common salvage, or 2 common salvage + 1 uncommon salvage depending on the buff. The request is for the buff duration to be reduced to 1 hour, but also be stackable up to 8 hours duration if crafted 8 times. Opposition is that the cost of the buffs for 8 hours of benefit is not sufficient for benefits received, the time required to go back and replenish said buffs is part of the cost of those buffs, and removing the time required to go back and refresh the buffs needs to be offset if the buffs are made stackable. The reasons given for why the OP should be done or why the OP should not be done is the circular argument of power creep vs quality of life vs irrelevant change vs anything else going on. Does that help?

@Sunsette makes a good point. I get the desire to not have to deal with the cut scenes we've seen ad nauseum, but those cut scenes are often the only part of the story the team members are getting and not everyone has done all the TFs, SFs, or iTrials (if iTrials are to be part of the OP for cutting). Yes, new players can be referred to the wiki or be told to run the TF/SF themselves and so know what the story is, but there is already at least one thread asking for team members to get to see what the team leader sees for mission briefings and debriefings, and removing the cut scenes just because the team leader has already seen them worsens that position for other players. So with that in mind, how could the OP be modified to accomplish what the author wants while also retaining the ability for new players to see the cut scene without having to double back and run the TF or SF again themselves just to find out what the cut scene they were denied had?

It was a level 3 SO because the mission was a level 3 mission.

I tried that, but the salvage caps keeps saying no. Even if you scale up the salvage to Uncommon and then Rare depending on buff stacking level as opposed to just doubling the salvage requirements, that still puts it out of reach for starters and lowbies. That's why I think having a scaling up inf' cost, with a different base cost for the 2nd hour based on the character's level and then doubling up from there to match the inf' costs of buying amplifiers to 8 hours is fair. It leaves buffs available for free (sans cheap salvage) at the 1st hour, has a minor inf' cost for the 2nd, and progresses up from there.

I both agree with and disagree with the OP. I agree with the part where you go into an old Mafia movie and you are fighting Family with advanced weapons. That part makes no sense, but I do understand that it was done to make the movie Family a threat to the player. I disagree with the part about the Family just being your common criminals. Yes, they are that, but they are also aren't. Let me explain. One of the things you see in later Family arcs, by which I mean the point at which prior to their upgrade to be level 40+ enemies, is their attempt to improve their power base with advanced weaponry. It shows up in 1 tip mission I believe, and it shows up in a blue side arc where the Family are negotiating with the Sky Raiders. Then eventually there is a mission/arc where the Family manages to get their hands on the advanced weapons they use. So their goal of updating themselves to keep pace with and hopefully outperform the supers is met. There is also the fact that while the Family may be rooted in archaic mafia motifs, any organization, especially a criminal one that wants to survive in a super world, will and should be adapting their methods and goals. They can still retain their business suits and 50's gangster talk, that falls under retaining tradition within such an organization, but their methods, equipment, and even goals can change to reflect the changing world around them. So on those grounds, I'm fine with the high level Family, except for that one TV mission. As for the Sky Raiders? Yeah, they need to be updated too.

Yes and no. I agree that the cost in salvage to get 8 hours of buff is negligible, but this argument either needs clarification or is misunderstanding the other side's argument. They aren't asking for the single buff they get from the empowerment station to last for 8 hours, they are asking for the ability to stack the buffs to 8 hours by crafting each buff 8 times after having the current durations reduced to 1 hour from 1.5 hours. I agree that is a joke cost and that the cost of the buffs is the time the player has to spend going back to any base to refresh their buffs. So please don't think I am disagreeing with you. However, if their proposal was modified so that the 1st hour still has the same costs as current but each subsequent hour they craft to stack has an increasing cost in inf' to make up for the stacking time, would that work for you? Adding a cost for any stacking buffs past the first of meaningful value should help, right? (The question here being what constitutes "meaningful value".)

Water Control: Sinkhole: I don't think that name fits for a water effect personally. Sinkholes, at least to me, are more of a ground effect than a water one, though they can be caused by water. Maybe Water Trap? Water Control: Flood: Should probably be a KB or Repel effect. While I know of floods trapping people, the flood itself tends to carry things/people away. Liquid Armor: Storm Drain: I'm sorry, I just keep thinking of gutters and sidewalk drains here. Maybe even arroyos. Maybe Dessicate? Liquid Armor: Ink Burst: And now I've got squid on the brain.... I don't know, maybe Misdirecting Mist, Eye Splash, or something else more water-y? Sorry that I only have feedback on the names. I'm still puzzling out the effects, but for the most part, I guess it looks fine.

Start having them just move around so you'll have to chase them down. Have the explore badge markers get up and start running away when the players get too close. And when they aren't being chased by players, they just randomly get up and change locations anyway. 😛

Just wanted to emphasize this. Yes, more options are a good thing, always. If you have the choice of playing a MM with ten costumes or a MM with four and pet customization, and you really want those ten costumes, don't customize your pets. You're still in the same place you are now. No, that makes pet customization a price rather than an option. An option is something the player can make use of and not give up something else about the character. For instance, double xp from START has a price, you lose inf' gain while using the double xp buff. Turning off xp is an option. It gives the player the ability to remove xp gain on the character without requiring the player to give something else up for that option. Telling players they can have pet customization but only if they limit their character's own costume choice availability by an equal number of costumes as the pet customizations is a price. Edit: And yes, there are probably a lot of players willing to pay that price to customize their pets. That does not change that you are paying a price on your character for pet customizations rather than using an option. If it was an option, then everyone could make use of it rather than just those willing to give up costume slots.

It is according to Aristotle, alchemists, and onmyoji! 😄

I'm not riled up? Exactly. I don't care if this is the method that the HC devs employ as long as it is not the method the other server employs which actually does take away from available character slots. I want customizable pets. I would like the pets to have a specific appearance, preferably by individual pet, to match my MM's appearance. So I don't care what method the HC devs employ that gives us customizable pets as long as it is not the 'use up one of your limited character costume slots' option the other server does. If additional costume slots are added to the character specifically for the henchmen and can only be accessed by a specific tailor at each of the tailor shops? Fine, I don't care. Make it so. It works for me. Edit: My indifference is to choosing a method, not to the method itself other than the one used by that other server. I'm not indifferent to the method from the other server, I'm opposed to it. I'm indifferent between other options that accomplish the desired goal because any of them are good and I don't have a preference between them.

They could add 600 costume slots to each character that way if the game engine allowed it, divvied up at 100 per pet, and I wouldn't care. Because I'm not losing any of my character costume slots to the pets that way.

Going Rogue and Issue 18 were released August 17, 2010. At that point in time, we could side swap and the tailors were not limiting our characters in costume slots beyond the total number of missions available. 3 from blue side, 3 from red side, 1 to start, 1 from Halloween salvage. Edit: Regardless, we at least had 5 costume slots before, we have 10 now, and I have several characters that use at least 7 of their costume slots. My main MM uses all 10 slots. So I'm not in favor of giving up costume slots for our pets, especially after the HC devs have said they will not go that route and are looking into a different means.

Looking at City of Data... Fault is weird.... I'm looking at the Scrapper version, and Fault executes two different versions. The 1st version, Stone Melee.Fault Scrapper, does no damage, has a guaranteed KD effect, and a guaranteed Mag 2 Stun effect for 2 seconds. The 2nd version, Stone Melee.Fault Cone Scrapper, has a 100% chance of doing damage with a 5% chance of doing a little more damage to low tier mobs, but lacks the KD and Stun effects. So... I guess report this as a bug that you aren't getting the damage component applied as well?

It's not a question of self-preservation. It's a question of logical and efficient use of resources. The presented AI doesn't seem like it lacks self-preservation as a goal, it seems like it is actively seeking its own destruction and the destruction of its assets. Edit: Oh, and I should also point out that just because a robotic shell or body includes comms, that doesn't mean there is a CPU to override or take control over, or that those comms are even connected to robotic control systems. In the case of the Freakshow and most of the Arachnos "robots", in order to take over their bodies, you have to attach a control unit to seize control from the organic components that are their control units unless the AI has a means of overwriting or taking over organic brains. In which case, why didn't it just take control of the PCs? (Edit again: That was something I didn't understand or like about the Battlestar Galactica reboot. "We have to go low tech or the Cylons will remotely take over our craft!" Uhm, why not just make your ships and fighters without remote radio or wireless control or software access? If you limit access to your computer systems to physical interfaces rather than radio or wireless update capabilities, then they can't be remotely seized and you can use as state of the art electronic systems as you want. Best defense against remote hacking? "Air gapping". Keep your systems isolated except for direct physical, in-person access. You still have networked comms, and you include as many counter-measures as you can against Cylon interception, jamming, and mimicry as you can, but if your control systems are isolated and can only be changed at the base/ship by direct hands-on access, then the Cylons having exceptional remote hacking ability means nothing unless they attach a drone or other launched device that burrows into the craft and then overrides the computer software.)

I don't like the "took one for the team" part. That's a cheap way to write off characters. Hells, even in Justice League looked at the cliche of a trope and said "Nope". When Batman was steering the League's orbiting base to crash into the Hawks' facility to keep it from wiping out Earth, Superman tore his way back into the falling station looking rather pissed as he grabbed Batman and flew him out of the station before it hit. There are so many ways around that self sacrifice bit. The players can disable the steering thrusters after setting the course and then all leave. A flying character can steer the satellite down until it is impossible to redirect to unwanted areas, tear or blast their way out, and fly off. A teleporting character can just teleport out after redirecting the satellite becomes pointless and keep teleporting to safety. The controls that steer the satellite can be destroyed after setting course with the same effect as destroying steerage thrusters. Creative players can figure out even more ways. I don't like perma-death scenarios in video games. Setting aside my pet peeve over forced character death, the AI itself doesn't make sense. The OP reads like the AI is suicidal and so makes all its bots also suicidal. Destroying its own facilities and combat force as anything other than absolute last resort is not a sensible AI. You can take a page from the TF or SF (I can't remember which version) where you fight Reischman at the end, but instead of just 20 minutes of constant ambushes, the mission can spawn constant ambushes of drone swarms or combat bots or whatever that the players have to deal with. And to keep it from being a farm, make these constant ambush units worth 0 xp and inf' or very little xp and inf'. Have the AI doggedly defending its assets rather than throwing them away. Only have the AI destroy its assets when that asset is lost to take out the team and deny assets to its enemies. (Edit: If you want a timer, make it something other than the AI throwing its assets away. Like you have X time before the AI's system at that facility finishes breaking through military firewalls and seizing military drone vehicles and combat robots, making the AI effectively unassailable through conventional means. Or it is hacking into nuclear control systems across the globe and if you don't complete the mission in time, the world is a nuclear apocalypse. [Which obviously won't happen because of game reasons, but it does fail the TF.]) (Edit again: Or the timer could be the time before the AI activates a floor defense system which instant wipes out the party on the floor. So defeating the floor boss guarding the elevator buys you time by virtue of being on a different floor than the one the AI just triggered as death trap.) I do like the split the team for different objectives part, as long as it is not mandatory and the objectives are not linked for destruction or deactivation at the same time. The team faces a harder fight if they split up, but the mission provides benefits for doing so. Conversely, teams that stay together face easier fights for being able to directly aid each other in combat, but there are mission penalties for doing so. Edit: Also, you're going to run into network and coding problems between different factions. Praetorian and Rikti assets would most likely have had their networking and programming evolve differently than on Primal Earth. So they wouldn't be able to interface with a Primal AI without some external adjustments. And most of what we think are robots in Arachnos are actually robotic shells operated by a human head inside the 'robot'.

Beast Mastery is all about commanding nature, so how is that not a nature set? It's like an uber Ranger, Hunter, or Druid class in fantasy lore. Like @Greycat said, what exactly are you looking for as a nature set? Because the carve outs for what you don't consider nature has me thoroughly baffled.

I remember running around with 10 costumes for several of my alts well before then. That doesn't mean I'm remembering right, but your presented time frame feels wrong. If only because you could do all 3 tailor missions blue side, transfer red side, and do them all again for 8 costume slots including the Halloween one. And the Going Rogue update was not in the last year of the game's life.