Neiska

To go back on topic, I am fine with TW getting changed, particularly with the unwieldy momentum mechanic that plays like a bathtub on a slip n slide. I just hope they don't overnerf it, with regards to the other ATs that use it (Brutes and Tankers), instead of the bio/TW scrapper combo that seems to be the main issue with it. I have noticed no one has commented yet on Energy Melee, Trick Arrow, or the Blaster changes. The post says there will be more buffs than nerfs, so there is that. And my interest is peaked with the incarnate crafting system changes. (Hoping we might get to do something with excess threads) If we were allowed to wish for other things, personally I would throw recharge pets up for consideration, but that's just me.

Oh, they are using data they didn't create, no arguement there. But it was openly published data, used by others as well. Which in the data world isn't protected data anymore, correct? It would be similar to like, going after wikipedia for something they posted at this point, wouldn't it? Not sure how the legal stuff works there. Its very convoluted .

-Negotiations to become legitimized, according to rumor. I don't follow the latest news in that arena, but last I heard it was a thing. As far as "Stolen" goes, well, the code went public IIRC a bit over a year ago? Not 100% sure on the details that one either, but what I think happened is someone (no idea who) published the code for the game online, and from that sprung homecoming. (Might be 100% wrong here! So if someone knows the skinny feel free post a link or explanation)

1. ...Wow. Stolen? You are aware Homecoming is in discussions with the host company, right? 2. Id say they are the ones being flexible, and its you who isn't? @JayboH - -I would submit SoA for consideration to be put top of the list too please. (hugs crabberpack).

@Captain Yesterday- So, you're a game designer, who doesn't know what a user agreement is? And opposes its use?

You weren't tricked, forced, or coerced into accepting. That's precisely what a User Agreement is. Its the game host saying "we can and will change this at any time. and by you clicking this, you agree and acknowledge it." And I suspect nearly every online game has patches, updates, tweaks, and more. They aren't picking you out personally to nerf what you enjoy most. Because, logically by your argument, if someone else goes "hey this is fantastic I LOVE this change", well, that just nullified your entire case? It's fine to dislike a change. But your personal take on matters is hardly the only qualifier here.

You are missing the point. That's kind of sort of what they did. It even says "Hey this is what we are thinking about doing" on page 1. As far as allowing a sort of "player vote" on something, well, firstly I doubt people would agree on things. Secondly it wouldn't surprise me in the least if people tried to make multiple accounts or something to vote more than once etc. I don't think putting a game in the hands of a community would not go the way you might expect. Or there's personal bias, what "you" may want, "others" wouldnt. (thats fair to say about anyone though really.) And thus "you" would still be in the same place where you are right now. Lastly, the majority of players don't use the forums, its a minority. So you would have only 80% of a minority population deciding on game features. That to me, would be "actual" arbitrary "tyranny". Not ongoing updates you happen to disagree with, which is not "tyrannical" in the slightest. It says right in the user agreement that you sign to login each time "things may change". So this shouldn't be any sort of shock to you.

@ScarySai - Your first point - I don't think either way is lazy. If it is overperforming, then its overperforming. I guess the big question is how long it would take, no? There are heads wiser than mine for that sort of thing, but a nerf isn't necessarily a bad thing. Second point - I agree, we can say "hey this is bad, don't do this". But its important on how its presented. I mean, think about it. If you spent 5 months of free time to fix something to be reacted to like some of the posts here? If it was me, I would think long and hard about doing more changes. I mean it says right on the first page, in bright letters up top - Before we continue, a caveat: Some of the changes and plans mentioned below are either very early in development or still purely conceptual. Some of them will likely not make the cut and either change greatly or be scrapped entirely. Which to me means, "this is not set in stone." Open to further changes. But some people are acting like it's not. And how they are voicing that I find disconcerting. Your third point - I try to avoid mentioning other games in posts, but we were thinking of the same things. But that's my point. I don't want CoH to degrade into that. I don't want our Homecoming staff to get unmotivated so they stop doing changes, or even worse, pull the plug. And we do agree, that people are only passionate because they care. Which is a good thing. But I don't think its unreasonable to expect people to temper that passion when necessary either. To summarize, We agree that we are both thankful for the staff, and their changes. We also agree that not every change is automatically a good thing. But I do think some are being rather passive aggressive or worse when voicing their dislike. And I suspect our Homecoming team isn't very large to begin with. Which makes me concerned. Speaking as someone who has been behind the curtain before, too much negativity does have an impact on morale and motivation. And you are right, "Toxic" was probably a bad way to put it, but I hope it doesn't get to that point here, which is why I made the post to begin with. Best Wishes

Just me thinking aloud here but, 1. I do think its easier via coding and labor to nerf overperforming sets, rather than try to balance the other ones that are underperforming on one AT, much less the same powerset useable across multiple ATs. So there is that. 2. Personally, I am glad to see changes at all in a game this aged. Do I personally agree 100% with every change that comes about? No. But nor do I expect to. I mean, we are lucky that we get changes at all to be blunt. We aren't paying for this game. We are "guests" here. We don't get to make demands. Technically, we aren't even "customers". This is a labor of love, that has been shared with the rest of us. And for that I am grateful. The people putting the time here are doing it of their own free will, when they likely have jobs/lives/etc going on. They aren't getting "paid" to do this. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them actually go out of pocket time to time to keep CoH afloat. 3. I have noticed a bit of a change over time in the community. When it first started, the community seemed more supportive and positive. But after reading some comments here, I can't say its gotten better. Only the Dev's and Moderators know for sure but where I'm sitting, its seemed to have grown more toxic. I do hope its just me seeing that, because if it is getting more toxic, then for me the game is loosing some of what made it stand out to begin with. The people. It wasn't like other games where the community was harsh, sometimes openly hostile to one another. But now, I'm not so sure. And how I see it, that has more to do with people leaving (if they are) than any updates/changes/fixes that have been done. Lastly, I do want to thank everyone on the Homecoming team for their time and effort into keeping things running. Best wishes.

I was referring more to posts like these. Where there are no examples, numbers, or data to draw from. It comes off as a "My way or its wrong" sort of comment. If you want to help change things, think of it as a task to change their minds or opinion, which is entirely possible. I've seen it happen. But these are a bit passive aggressive. If I was a developer, I would read what you wrote and think "well they don't like it" and move onto the next post. If you feel that a change is wrong, then prove it. Post the math, show some data. Take some screenshots and run some statics. If you want change, then I'm afraid the burden of proof is on you. I do appreciate you are so passionate about the game, really, I do. But I don't think posts like these would likely change someone's mind. I mean, put yourself in their shoes, and think about what sort of post or comment would make them stop and go "Hmm, did we overlook something?" They are people too, and people make mistakes. But being polite with data will go much further to make actual impacts on changes than posts about "You're destroying characters. Making people quit. You should spend your free volunteer time doing X, Y, Z." Best wishes.

If I may make a suggestion @Noyjitat, "how" you say something is just as important as "what" you say. You might try to rephrase your opinion to be more constructive. Post hows, whens, and whys. Provide examples, and so on. Not just "This sucks and you guys suck omg this game sucks" is hardly anything to take as constructive. If you want a developer to consider your comments earnestly, you might want to give them something to stand on, metaphorically speaking. No one is saying you cant voice your opinion, I just think how you are phrasing it isn't likely to get any desired result. Conduct goes a long way as far as feedback and criticism goes. Best wishes.

Just my opinion but, balancing powers in a majority PvE game for PvP reasons doesn't seem like a good idea.

With regards to Titan Weapons, I think it only really outperforms or is OP on scrappers, but what about Tanks and Brutes? If they change it too much, then tanks and brutes wont take it either, which might as well be a scrapper only powerset at that point? (I don't know if it is OP on tankers/brutes, but I rarely ever see them. See far more TW scrappers than anything else.) I think if they gave it a recharge penalty instead of a damage penalty, that would be better for all 3 ATs overall wouldn't it? I had my fingers crossed that they were going to look at the epic ATs - Soldiers, Widows, Warshades, and Peacebringers. I see fewer and fewer of any of them now. Compaired to the other ATs, the "epic" ATs really are anything but epic. Pretty sure I'm the only one in my SG still rocking the crabber spiderpack. ☹️ Crabbermind is still fun to play, but its probably the weakest of all my fully geared 50's. Oh well, maybe next time around.

My two cents, for what its worth. Firstly, yes balance is important in any multiplayer game, in both PVE or PVE. However, I would like to highlight that everyone's definition of balance wont align. If PVE balance doesn't matter, then what does anything matter? Why would Purple IOs matter, why would incarnate matter, why would level matter, why would incarnates matter, why would the game matter? I mean, if one AT was so absurdly stronger than any other, why have different classes whatsoever at that point? A lot of people seem to focus on just damage as the "metric" to compare things too. Well, what about defenses? Team support? Buffs/debuffs? CC? It's a tricky balancing act, but I don't think damage should be the main focus that everything is balanced from, particularly in a game like this where a few changes with Powers and Slotting can make a big difference even on the X power/X power AT. Some powersets really only shine at high levels, others require a ton of cooldown reduction to make viable. Some are very expensive while others are cheap. But there is more - One thing that I think people forget about is where the "goalpost" is. What exactly are we using as the finish line to compare ATs? Are we comparing them all on +4/8 difficulty? Are we speaking solo? Or team play? Are we talking AoE? or are we talking single targets? Perhaps some people can sometimes compare apples to oranges when talking about balancing. I mean lets take Mastermind for example. They are still sort of the solo specialists, some being able to kill AVs and more on the regular. I would say the majority of AT's aren't capable of that. But I don't think anyone thinks that Masterminds need to be nerfed. Indeed, sometimes Masterminds are on the lower end of things if we are only talking about "damage" here. It's the Masterminds "total package" that allows it to do that. As far as comparing ATs go, I do feel like every AT sort of has their role and place with regards to each other. Not all will perform as well as others on the same content, same difficulty, or even same team makeup. Basically here's how I see them. I know its a lot more involved than this, because some powerset choices can mean you're a buffer or debuffer and so on, only posting this for a rough idea. - The Tough ATs - Tankers, Brutes, and (some) Masterminds The Damage Doers - Scrappers, blasters, corruptors, stalkers The Control Specalists - Dominators, Controllers, The Buffers/debuffers - Defenders, Sentinels, (some) Masterminds, The Oddballs - SoA's, Widows, Warshades, Peacebringers I mean, not everyone plays on +3 or 4/8. I don't think every build is even capable of that. If it were up to me, I would focus on balancing things around the 2/8 difficulty, and treat higher difficulties as a "bonus" difficulty for people who like to redline builds. With regards to powersets on the same ATs, I feel there are definitely some that outperform others, so that could be looked at perhaps. What's bothered me though as far as ATs and builds are concerned, is that some pools are considered near mandatory for a majority of builds, such as Haste, or Boxing/Tough/Weave from the fighting secondary pool. That's 4 powerslots that are close to must haves for a lot of builds out there. As far as "balancing" goes, I would try to urge people to picture in what scenario would a specific AT be the best at what its meant to do - Heal, AOE damage, Kill a ST quickly, buff, debuff, and so on. Every AT should have its own situation where it shines "more" than the rest. Though this sort of excepts the Warshades and Peacebringers, as they are "stance" based. They can do a lot all in one AT, just not as well as other ATs. But I would think that ability to do different things/roles is sort of a special note in itself, as they can tank, damage, buff and so on, just not all at once. Just my thoughts on it. TLDR - Yes, balance is important. But there's more than just "damage done" to balance around. It also matters on what sort of content as well as difficulty setting to consider.

I would say its more of a "I like to eat out. But I dont like that one resteraunt." To which we are hearing "But not all resteraunts are bad". And I would say "Youre right, they arent all bad, but that doesnt make me like that one resteraunt any better. Comparing this bad resteraunt to another bad resteraunt isnt going to make me suddenly like bad resteraunts."

Speaking purely for myself, I cannot recall any game where the PVP crowd was 100% happy. If there are examples of a healthy, thriving, vibrant PVP community, I would be curious as to what some examples might be. And I always hated games that tweaked PvE mechanics or abilities for PVP reasons, and vice versa. I am not saying they should be seprated or the same in CoH or any other game, there are far wiser heads than mine who could run those numbers. I just hated when they change one aspect of the game for the sake of another, when supposedly they were seperate systems or not related to one another.

@RageusQuitus - to the OP, I think the discussion has gotten a bit off topic. People cant seem to agree on PvP in general, or why some people aren't interested in it. But there are likely players out there willing to give PvP a try, you just have to find and get your message to them. That said however, please understand that there are players out there that want no part of PvP as it is in its current form. As far as me personally? Well, there really is nothing you can do yourself that would make me interested in PvP in CoH. If they added tools or any sort of controls/system to it along with a league or ranking system, I might be tempted. What would be important to me would be that it would be by choice. It would have to be so that I willfully entered PvP at a time of my choosing, and that it wasnt thrusted or forced upon me. (I hasten to add that I am not saying that it currently is. I am not on a pvp server, and I don't enter pvp areas.) But in no way will I ever be interested in "open world" PVP where people can and do gank and harrass other players, which would inhibit my own enjoyment of the game. If the entire game was like that, I would uninstall and move onto something else entirely. I don't "gank" people. I would get zero enjoyment out of attacking a person lower level than me. It would'nt be challenging, or even fun. I could slay this player with a single attack and there wasnt anything they could do about it, and it would not take any measure of skill. Nor would I have any interest in suddenly fighting a player while on a mission and so on. I would find getting ganked by an entire team of people even less enjoyable. I might be interested in an arena or dueling scenerio, where pvp was expected and agreed upon. But I personally take a pretty dim view of the open world ganking style of PVP. They had it in another game I wont mention. I did not enjoy it in the slightest. And in such an enviroment where players could attack each other without controls, well, I never once had a PVP fight that "fair" or "equal". It likely didn't even come down to skill. Any player of the opposite faction that I came across, we didnt "duke it out". We mostly ignored each other, sometimes even helping one another in some cases. Most players in the area were just trying to quest, and along would come this ??? level player, swooping down out of the sky to one shot you and dance on your corpse. And this might persist. For hours. And no amount of "git gud" could prevent that, and there were no tools to make it stop aside from the "log out" button. I don't know what sort of person it takes to find that fun, or enjoyable, or would even pay money to be in such a situation. The biggest thing stopping me from being interested, is the possibility of griefers and gankers. I am not willing to be in such a position, and will not allow myself to be put into such a position. And to my limited knowledge, there are no tools available for such a situation. My only options would be to use the teleport to base macro, and then put them on ignore if things got heated and I didnt wish to communicate with them, and simply try to finish the task I was doing at another time. And thats not really an option at all. Heck, I am not even sure if the teleport macro works in PvP zones. It wouldn't suprise me in the least if it didn't. TLDR - To your orginal question, "what would make me personally interested to try it?" It really depends on the kind of PVP you mean. If you mean an arena? Mabye, if there are tools and controls. Open world PVP? That would be a hard, HARD "No thank you" from me. To me, thats not PVP, or even dueling. Thats ganking/griefing/trolling.

@The_Warpact - Agreed, but I would like to perhaps give you another angle that you may not have considered. Some people, have quite stressful lives and play games to unwind or relax, and don't do it for more excitement. In my own real life work, its competitive. That's why I quit high end raiding in other games. Some people just want to kick back after a long day at work with an adult beverage, and just enjoy their own personal preferred kind of gameplay. As far as being emotional goes, well, I would certainly classify "smack talking" as an emotionally driven response as well, which certainly is a thing in PVP. And for the record, I do hope the OP succeeds too. More friends for everyone is a good thing in my book. And while you didn't cite me personally, you did insinuate that people who don't enjoy PVP can be that, which does include myself. So even while its not a game activity I enjoy myself, I can still support those that do. But a part of that is proving peoples assumptions wrong too. I've seen many duelers/pvpers who still acted with a sense of respect and decorum. So no, they aren't all bad. But suggesting that all Non-pvpers are those things, are just as bad as calling Pvpers griefers/trolls/toxic and so on. So lets have both sides do each other the favor and not label one another? So lets not suggest "All PVPers are X" or "All Non-pvpers are Y" and so on, yes? Because that sort of thought is limiting, restrictive, and insulting in some cases, and is hardly productive. So live and let live, yes?

With respect Warpact, those are pretty big words considering your previous statement. While you are right, it can "go both ways" as far as toxicity goes, but I do think that is the minority on both sides. Also I do like to think that in my post, as well as my brief interactions with you I was respectful. More or less I just said "Its not my thing. But I don't mind people who do enjoy it." I even offered a detailed suggestion to the OP about how they might go about getting attention and new people by making a pvp focused supergroup that doesn't just gank or duel, but also teaches. But my main point I wanted to say, is that if you want to be seen differently, you also have to act differently. If I wanted to be in an environment where I could be ganked while questing or while doing my own thing, I would likely be playing a different game with more tools for that gameplay. On a personal note, I don't appreciate the insinuation that people who dont enjoy PVP are scared/emotional/or take things personal. I could make the claim that Pvpers just want more victims/easy targets to harass and to troll. Both statements are petty and beneath everyone involved. And your statements, as well as those like it, probably don't come off as particularly welcoming to fellow players who might be interested in the gameplay you and others are so passionate about. Food for thought.

Whew.. thank goodness for that. I know its not going on now, and I don't know if that even was a thing before, but gotta say, that is a doozy. 100% not my thing. No hard feelings against those that did want that, but I would have been very put out if it was 100% applied to everyones base. So horray for "Opt In's"?

Reading through some of the comments here, I would like to say that I am kind of suprised by what people consider "cheating". To me, "cheating" is using outside hacking/botting programs or things expressly against the terms of use. But systems within the game itself, if they are available to everyone, that isnt cheating. Everyone has the same access to the same tools. Not everyone will agree different tools are "just and fair" for their perfered playstyle. And therein lays the crux of the issue. A few examples mayhaps. One friend of mine, plays by what he calls the "Iron Man" rules. He never buys "anything". No P2W, no auction house, he doesnt even buy plain IOs from vendors. He only uses the materials he finds himself, the IOs he finds himself, the recipies he finds himself. Thats all! So to him, he very well could claim "anyone who spends infamy that isnt crafting" is cheating, at least by his own self imposed rules and playset. (Note- He doesnt claim that at all! I am only illustrating for the point). Another example, another friend of mine, well she is deaf IRL. She can read and type just fine. But she can't hear. And she plays the game too. Well, logically by some arguments here, she could say that anyone who uses voice chat or discord is cheating, by her standards as well. Now she doesnt begruge anyone who uses those things, again, only illustrating the point. And I also conceed before anyone comments, that these are two very extreme examples, and are by and far not the normal! I guess what I am trying to say is, maybe people should stop focusing on other people, how others play, and how others have fun. And perhaps focus on their own enjoyment and what makes them enjoy the game. Don't like P2W? Thats fine! Don't use it. But mabye dont begruge others that do use it. Don't like AE? Thats fine too! Don't use it. No one is cocering or twisting your arm to. But its there for those that enjoy it. Don't like PvP? Thats fine as well! Then don't. But allow people who do or dont like it to enjoy it. Don't like story missions? Thats also okay! Not everyone likes doing the same ones over and over. And not everyone has the time to play through an entire story mission! They might only have 30 minutes or so to play, for whatever RL things they have going on. Don't like the Auction House? Thats okay too! Don't use it if you dont want to. I bet the sense of accomplishment would be fantastic if you do get a fully leveled hero using purely self found and made things! (honestly, I think that would be pretty epic to accomplish.) Don't share these opinions? Thats fine too! Everybodys different. Everyone is going to like different things, or play differently. Even in the same game! But I like to think thats what also is the game's strong point, how it can appeal to so many different sorts of people all within the same game - the Powergamers, the Dedicated Roleplayers, the Hardcore Storymode Heroes, the Soloers, the Raiders, the Auction House Watchers, the Supergroup Folks, the Lone Wolves, the Base Builders, the Contest Hosters, and more. Not everyone is going to agree here, and I would say thats normal, to be expected in fact. But I do hope that we can all agree that we all have the same access to the same tools provided, and the only things that change is which ones we each perfer to use, and the manner in which we perfer to use them. So lets live and let live? I'll do my thing, you do yours, and maybe if we both like the same thing we can meet in the middle somewhere? And lets leave it up to the game moderators, hosts, and folks running this out of their own free time decide what is and is not cheating. Best wishes to all, no matter what sort of player you are!

I didnt even know that base raiding used to be a thing. If someone came into my base, and completely thrashed what might have spent weeks if not months making, for what, and hour of pvp content? I would probially immediately quit. And I am pretty sure I am not the only one who would feel that way. Basebuilding more or less feels like a home, or a private space. Having a bunch of randoms storm in and wreck the place would feel like a violation not just of my time and effort, but also of my personal area. That very much should be an "opt into" system, not an "all bases are fair game". Becuase yes, it might be exciting for the pvpers at first, but after the first time it happened, I wouldn't build anything ever again. Not if someone else can just come along and wreck it. And yes, the higher skilled/bigger pvp people would quickly over run the smaller groups or non pvp groups. And I don't see many people being gluttons for punishment, not if their base is getting wrecked once a week or so. Which sort of leads me to why I dont like PVP. There are some respectful duelers out there, but please remember - what tools you give one group of people, you give to all. There would be nothing stopping a group of PVP griefers who like nothing better than to ruin other peoples day and playtime. In some games the entire PVP crowd can be quite toxic. (I hasten to add I make no claims that our pvpers are like that! Only the possibility certainly exists.) I guess what I am trying to say is, is that if a Pvper goes around griefing and ganking people who don't want to be involved whilest doing the "mocking jig", I suspect he would quickly run out of people willing to be victims. A few might try to get some payback certainly. But as for me and my group of friends, well, we would likely quit in droves. I don't care to play a game that enables and even rewards griefers. Or lets people who simply want to play/farm/adventure/rp in their own little way do it. You can't shove people who want different things into a sandbox and go "now you two be nice", expecting them to happilly go back and forth. And be shocked when some of them just quit and move to a different playground. Base raiding should not be a compulsary thing. I have no qualms against other groups of people staging them, but there should be a safety switch for people who dont want their stuff messed with.

Forwarning - Total newbie here, but I hope this offers some insight to the OP. I have never engaged in any serious PVP yet, only with friends when we were goofing around and just having fun. But we sort of went into that expecting it. (Adult beverages were involved, and it involved a lot of bouncing/ranged targeting/"for the lols" gameplay, so I very much doubt it was any form of serious pvp.) 1. As far as I can tell, the PVP here is very much like the Battledome from Mad Max. Two enter, one leaves. No rules, regulations, controls, or moderation. So someone like me with that fresh newbie smell, could get matched up against the server Sparticus. If there was some sort of system that could match players of similar skill level and equipment level I might consider it. But getting completely trounced/burst dps'd/CC'd doesnt teach anything. If a "level one" in pvp terms kept getting instantly killed by the "lvl 50" pvper, how is the new person to get any better? There is no gradient curve to learn from as far as I can tell. 2. Mentioned before in earlier posts, the at's/builds/skills/ios/powersets/pvp information seemes to be known to few. I can't confirm or deny this one way or another, but it's just what I have heard. I have yet to see a written "CoH PVP guide" anywhere here on the forums. Granted, I wasnt really looking, but if you want PVP to be taken seriously, than that stuff needs to be public knowledge. 3. Since there is no moderation, you might get someone who has plain fresh 50 IOs against someone with all the purples. Which I suspect wouldn't be a matter of skill, but more of who had more money to burn. 4. Lastly, I personally have always favored tough/durable classes, and pet classes in games. So naturally, here my favored classes are Tanker, Brute, Crabbermind, and Mastermind. And usually (at least in other games), both pet classes and "tank" classes are not really meant for pvp play. For pvp its always been about the burst damage, the CC, the clickables to give you that extra edge, and general game knowledge. This may or may not be the case in CoH, but I suspect that it is. Point is, PVP simply isnt for everyone. I find the thrill of standing against insurmountable enemies and saving my team, and surviving impossible odds far more satisfying than PVP. And I am not really keen to spend the money gearing up for pvp without any sort of controls, guides, or game records involved. However, this isn't all doom and gloom. I do have suggestion for you to consider OP. In another game, there was a group of players who wanted to attract more people for PVP. So they used the tools they had available, and ended up making a "PVP Guild". (I think it was called Training Wheels?). In a since, they had different "officers" for different "ranks" of pvpers. One officer would oversee the newbies and keep track of wins/losses. After like 50 wins, they could move up to the moderate rank, and so on. (Not positive those were their numbers, only giving an example for understanding.) Anyway, what you could do is a setup similar to this - Newbie Pvpers - players new to pvping, with limited/basic gear only. Whose focus wasnt to "win", but instead to practice and learn the specific game mechanics and tactics wehre pvpers were concerned. Wins and losses were not recorded at this stage. Moderate Pvpers - players with some experience, with expanded gear selection. They were supposed to focus on advancing their skills and learning team dynamics and the like. This is also where they started to keep track of their wins/losses. Expert Pvpers - this group were the most skilled and geared, who knew what they were doing. And this is where the teams/wins/losses/record started to matter. I mean, you could have officers over seeing each Teir of pvpers. With the overall Leader moderating the officers. I would suggest focusing on mentorship and building a pvp community, rather than what some games have. (lawlz git gud scrub mentality). It's just a suggestion. Though I think you can admit OP that this game is not really designed with PVP in mind, so I doubt its balanced for it. Also bare in mind that PVP isnt for everyone. Personally, I would only do it with friends. Because win or loose, I know its all in good fun, and not the focus of our play. And honestly, I just don't find PVP all that enjoyable at all. I've never been very good at it, particularly with my perfered classes and playstyle. And I don't particularly enjoy getting CC spammed or Instantly bursted (even though im supposedly a tough/defensive archtype) before I can do anything. And then getting mocked/teabagged/git gud scrub/what have you. Why would I do all that, when I don't even enjoy it. I didn't in other games, even if they had mounts/pets/titles/gear/rewards. In this game I suspect you would only find die hard fans of pvp, die hard COH fans, or very bored or ineberated players just out having a good time. TLDR - I dont usally PVP, but if there was a group offering to teach, and helpful guides to read up on, I might consider it. This is your community too PVP fans. Nothing says you cant build your own PVP communty here! Even if its only player moderated and controlled, a "gentlemans agreement" PVP community is better than none I would think? Just my two cents. I hope it helps OP!

Here's my crabber, the high res one. I can swap out resil for muscles if i need to, and I do think people forget you can have 3 builds on a character. I have others if im doing an ITF or have my SG with me. This is just the one I play when soloing or farming. I like being self sufficient and not having to rely overly much on inspirations or outside buffs. --------------- Villain Plan by Mids' Reborn : Hero Designer 2.6.0.7 https://github.com/ImaginaryDevelopment/imaginary-hero-designer Click this DataLink to open the build! Level 50 Technology Arachnos Soldier Primary Power Set: Crab Spider Soldier Secondary Power Set: Crab Spider Training Power Pool: Flight Power Pool: Fighting Power Pool: Speed Power Pool: zc_Leadership Ancillary Pool: Mace Mastery Villain Profile: Level 1: Channelgun -- EntChs-Heal%(A) Level 1: Crab Spider Armor Upgrade -- GldArm-3defTpProc(A), UnbGrd-ResDam(3), UnbGrd-ResDam/EndRdx(3) Level 2: Combat Training: Defensive -- LucoftheG-Def(A), LucoftheG-Def/Rchg+(5) Level 4: Hover -- LucoftheG-Def/Rchg+(A) Level 6: Kick -- Acc-I(A) Level 8: Suppression -- AchHee-ResDeb%(A), Ann-ResDeb%(9), Bmbdmt-Dam/Rech(9), Bmbdmt-Acc/Dam/Rech(11), Bmbdmt-+FireDmg(11), PstBls-Dam%(13) Level 10: Tactical Training: Maneuvers -- Rct-Def(A), Rct-Def/EndRdx(13), Rct-Def/Rchg(23), Rct-Def/EndRdx/Rchg(34), Rct-ResDam%(37), LucoftheG-Def/Rchg+(40) Level 12: Venom Grenade -- PstBls-Dam%(A), Bmbdmt-Dam(43), Bmbdmt-Acc/Dam/Rech(43), Bmbdmt-+FireDmg(46), SprSpdBit-Rchg/Global Toxic(50) Level 14: Tough -- UnbGrd-ResDam(A), UnbGrd-ResDam/EndRdx(15), UnbGrd-ResDam/EndRdx/Rchg(15), UnbGrd-Max HP%(23) Level 16: Weave -- LucoftheG-Def/EndRdx(A), LucoftheG-Def(17), LucoftheG-Def/Rchg+(17) Level 18: Frag Grenade -- FrcFdb-Rechg%(A), SuddAcc--KB/+KD(19), Bmbdmt-Dam(19), Bmbdmt-Acc/Dam/Rech(21), Bmbdmt-+FireDmg(21) Level 20: Tactical Training: Leadership -- GssSynFr--Build%(A) Level 22: Mental Training -- Run-I(A) Level 24: Fortification -- StdPrt-ResDam/Def+(A), StdPrt-ResKB(25), UnbGrd-ResDam(25), UnbGrd-ResDam/EndRdx(34) Level 26: Frenzy -- Arm-Dmg(A), Arm-Dmg/Rchg(27), Arm-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(27), Arm-Acc/Rchg(31), Arm-Dmg/EndRdx(33), Arm-Dam%(34) Level 28: Serum -- Prv-Heal(A), Prv-Heal/Rchg(29), Prv-Heal/Rchg/EndRdx(29), Prv-Absorb%(31) Level 30: Hasten -- RechRdx-I(A), RechRdx-I(31) Level 32: Maneuvers -- LucoftheG-Def(A), LucoftheG-Def/Rchg+(33), ShlWal-ResDam/Re TP(33) Level 35: Summon Spiderlings -- EdcoftheM-Acc/Dmg(A), EdcoftheM-Acc/EndRdx(36), EdcoftheM-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(36), EdcoftheM-Dmg(36), EdcoftheM-PetDef(37), ExpRnf-+Res(Pets)(37) Level 38: Call Reinforcements -- CaltoArm-Acc/Rchg(A), CaltoArm-Acc/Dmg(39), CaltoArm-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(39), CaltoArm-EndRdx/Dmg/Rchg(39), CaltoArm-+Def(Pets)(40), SlbAll-Build%(40) Level 41: Web Envelope -- GrvAnc-Immob(A), GrvAnc-Immob/Rchg(42), GrvAnc-Acc/Immob/Rchg(42), GrvAnc-Acc/Rchg(42), GrvAnc-Immob/EndRdx(43) Level 44: Shatter Armor -- SprBlsCol-Acc/Dmg(A), SprBlsCol-Dmg/EndRdx(45), SprBlsCol-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(45), SprBlsCol-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(45), SprBlsCol-Dmg/EndRdx/Acc/Rchg(46), SprBlsCol-Rchg/HoldProc(46) Level 47: Summon Blaster -- CaltoArm-Acc/Rchg(A), CaltoArm-Acc/Dmg(48), CaltoArm-Dmg/EndRdx(48), CaltoArm-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(48), CaltoArm-EndRdx/Dmg/Rchg(50), SvrRgh-PetResDam(50) Level 49: Tactical Training: Assault -- EndRdx-I(A) Level 1: Brawl -- Empty(A) Level 1: Prestige Power Dash -- Empty(A) Level 1: Prestige Power Slide -- Empty(A) Level 1: Prestige Power Quick -- Empty(A) Level 1: Prestige Power Rush -- Empty(A) Level 1: Prestige Power Surge -- Empty(A) Level 1: Conditioning Level 1: Sprint -- Empty(A) Level 2: Rest -- Empty(A) Level 4: Ninja Run Level 2: Swift -- Empty(A) Level 2: Health -- Pnc-Heal/+End(A), NmnCnv-Regen/Rcvry+(5), Mrc-Rcvry+(7) Level 2: Hurdle -- Empty(A) Level 2: Stamina -- PrfShf-EndMod(A), PrfShf-End%(7) Level 50: Ageless Core Epiphany Level 50: Ion Core Final Judgement Level 50: Support Core Genome Level 50: Degenerative Core Flawless Interface Level 50: Resilient Core Paragon ------------ ------------

It would seem that you also have strong opinions and abolute statments. What about new players, or simply players who have never ran that TF or trial? Taking the time to tell them too inconvient? I only think that your statement is kind of self defeating. You go from "I only want a TF to take 30-40 minutes, I dont want to grind" immediately to "the quality of the community is what makes it good" and then to "people who dont share the values of the community" (where you insinuate might be your own values) are out of place. I mean, in your single quote there you say people "have no idea how to play" and then say "people are able to learn and play together", to "people who dont value teamwork". Well, teamwork sometimes means that you have to take the lead, or be the mentor, or help teach your skills or pass your game knowledge onto others, and not immeidately assume that everyone is a pro, or even fully geared up, or that everyone who powerlevels to 50 out of convience don't know what they are doing. Your statements just come off as "people who dont play my way or enjoy the game the way I do" are wrong. Not everyone is going to want to play TFs, or trials, or even run them as many times as you have. Aren't they part of the community too? I am curiosus as to what you are expecting: flawless speed TF runs? Thats a very... narrow.... group or playstyle to base an entire sense of community upon. Not meaning to be a personal attack in any way shape or form. But what you said there just made me tilt my head a little, and they did come off as a little condensending, even if they are your stated opinion.