PeregrineFalcon

Isn't that also the same story behind Buffy the Vampire Slayer?

There are two compelling reasons for the devs to not implement what the OP suggests. First, you can already do this yourself (both show your global and see other people's) and second, time the devs spend on doing this, which will in no way improve the game, is time that they will not be able to spend working on something that will improve the game.

No one called YOU anything. Oklahoman wasn't replying to you nor naming you, and neither was I. And I don't even know what "sus" means. Once again, no one called you anything. Are you "people"? Any time anyone says "people" your first thought is "OMG! he's talking about me." Seriously? Once again, I wasn't talking about you. I wasn't referring to you. I was responding to Oklahoman about "people". FYI, "people" means people in general. It does NOT mean "that person with the word flea in their name." I don't know what the hell sus means, but dude, calm down. It's gonna be ok. The weekend's almost here.

My main is a tank. Recreated copy of my main on the retail servers. First of all holding aggro really hasn't changed since the aggro cap was put into place back around 2005. The only thing that's changed is that active mobs will still attack you if you're over the aggro cap instead of just walking away, but that's something you'll only see if you solo. Secondly, no AT is better at holding aggro than a Tank. Period. Full stop. End of story. There are a couple of ways to juggle over the aggro cap. Things like Footstomp, Handclap, Whirling Hands, Nemesis Staff. Basically anything that allows you to disable enemies, if only for a few seconds, then you Taunt another group of enemies. I've been able to keep as many as 25 enemies focused on me this way. But you're not going to hold more than that and you're not going to hold them on you for very long, so your team needs to kill them ASAP. So no, you cannot herd the entire map into a dumpster anymore. Not with a tank and not with any other AT. You haven't been able to do that in CoH since 2005.

I haven't seen a single post in this thread that says that. Please show me where I'm wrong. In any case I agree with you. You want your privacy then you should have it and you don't need a reason why. At no point did I say otherwise. Report. Block. TP to base. Move on. No one can stalk or harass you online unless you allow them to.

During beta testing the devs ignored hundreds of posts against the upgrades to Council and CoT and they went live. That's how resistant the Homecoming devs are to our "Feedback", which they ask for and then mostly ignore. I sincerely wish you luck with your attempt to get the devs to reverse the changes.

A lot of people still hold a grudge against Jack Emmert for a number of reasons, mostly because he lied to the players repeatedly. This was proven on more than one occasion. She's using the Ad Hominem logical fallacy by attacking Jack Emmert in order to assert that my claim of "just turn down the difficulty" is bad/wrong. And I don't know about launch, but when I first started playing CoH, just after Issue 6 went live, there was a difficulty system in game with 5 named tiers. Normal, Hard, Unyielding, Ridiculous and Invincible. Or something like that. As it was later explained, and all of this is probably on the wiki, normal was +0/x0 and each level added another +1 to the enemies. The only way to increase the number of enemies was to have more people on your team. I'm certain that the current difficulty system was put in place after Jack had already started working on the Marvel MMO which later became Champions Online, but I don't care enough to do the research to confirm that. If I'm wrong I'm sure someone will be along any minute now to ridicule me.

Regardless of what you think about Jack, and I'll probably agree with you on that, it doesn't change the fact that the current difficulty system was designed and implemented after he was no longer working on City of Heroes. And, in the current game, run by the current devs, x8 means "this content is for 8 players." I'm sorry if you can't solo content designed for 8 players, but you're literally here on the forums complaining about a problem that you can solve yourself by simply turning down the difficulty.

Well, you have to remember that these are the same people who, in the thread about streamers, posted that they'd have panic attacks if their character appeared on a live stream. And the same people who don't want to talk on VOIP with their friends, not random people, but people they've personally known for years. So yes, there's definitely something to what you're saying. And since I don't want to be sent on yet another forced vacation from the forums I'll leave it at that.

I like the effects. And I miss the original glow of Invulnerability.

To be fair, you were soloing on x8. x8 literally means "this content is for a full team of eight players." I agree with you that Council are really more annoying than challenging now. That being said there's still nothing wrong with turning your difficulty down a bit or picking another enemy group to fight.

To answer your question, since it doesn't appear that anyone else is, a small group of people spent a little over a year spamming the forums with threads complaining that "Game too easy, bruh!" Every day there was at least one new thread with that subject. Day after day after day after day. Over and over and over and again. For over a year. Meanwhile the Council of Thirteen checked the game metrics and noticed that a sizeable portion of the game play, that wasn't AE farming, was people steamrolling Council PI Radio missions. Day after day after day. Over and over and over again. So they responded by creating a Hard Mode for a new task force and implied that they'll be rolling out this Hard Mode setting to other task forces in the future. But that didn't stop the onslaught of constant "Game too easy, bruh!" threads. So they then revamped the Council and the CoT to be more difficult because that's what people who spent so much time spamming the forums wanted.

Yeah, the same community manager who was smack talking customers and who had previously said that customers were too lazy to take 120 seconds to make and link a PSN account. And now some people are trying to lionize him by claiming that Sony would never have given in if not for him "leading the charge." When, in fact, he just told people to do what they were already doing, and he didn't lead a damn thing. He flat out deserved to be fired, in my opinion.

Well, now that Sony made the announcement reverting the change people mostly went and changed their reviews. And it generated a ton of publicity online so ultimately it will probably generate more sales. Oh, and they fired the community manager and demoted one of their mods over things that they posted in the official discord that weekend. So while people are still vilifying Sony over it, Arrowhead has come through pretty much looking like the hero in all of this.

Yes. And on top of that some of the places where you can buy it you're not able to make and/or make alterations to a PSN account online, like you can in many places, you're required to do so only on a console for some reason. However, people who already purchased it in places where you can't make a PSN account can still play it, for now, but people in those areas can't buy it anymore so no new players from those countries. And, despite Sony tweeting out that they've decided not to "move forward" with requiring PSN account linking it still says on the Steam page that PSN account creation and linking is required.

Yes, what happened over the weekend is quite the story. tl;dr: Sony announced Friday afternoon that PC gamers would have to create and link Playstation Network accounts to their Steam account. Over the weekend gamers review bombed the game and requested refunds. Despite not being normally eligible for a refund Steam support was granting them anyway. Monday morning Sony execs walked into the office, freaked out when they saw the new review score, freaked out even more when they saw the report from Steam showing how much money they'd lost to refunds, and immediately released a statement canceling the forced PSN linking. Almost certainly not. Sony has a well earned reputation for being every bit as evil as EA.

Ah, I stand corrected, sir. So The Council of Thirteen it is and The Council of Thirteen it shall remain.

If you do a member search on the forums for City Council it literally shows 14 members. Hence The Council of Fourteen. I think it was Widower who was promoted. He used to be listed as Head GM, now he's shown as a member of the council.

Do you spend your time searching through other people's characters? Of course not so it doesn't really make a difference. However, it is difficult to search for the kind of mission you want to play if it's drowned in a zillion junk missions. The devs have said that's the reason that they limit the number of MA slots. I'm not a dev though so there's no point in trying to argue with me about it. I'm just the messenger.

They actually are a shadowy cabal, I don't know who they are, most of us plebes don't know who they are, and they set it up that way on purpose. Initially I'm sure it was to shield themselves and their careers should NCSoft decide to play hardball, so I certainly don't blame them for that. They may not have hoods, or even a table, but they a cabal who operates from the shadows. That's not an insult, merely a statement of fact. Sure, but that's not what happened with PK, and you know it. You say there's no malice involved and maybe you're right. But from where I'm at, on the outside looking in, it sure looked like there was in that particular case. Look, I didn't mean for my posts here to turn into criticism of The Council of Fourteen, I just contrary streak and an addiction to making sure that what's being said in conversation is factually accurate. Which, as I'm sure you can imagine, has insured that I'm pretty much always in trouble with someone.

There is a way that you can update and then save over the old mission without having to use up multiple slots, but it's been so long since I've made missions in the MA I don't remember how to do it. So that people don't fill up the MA database with a zillion farm and/or junk missions.

Since when has The Council of Fourteen cared about what we use for resources? Have we all just forgotten what they did when working on updating Force Fields? They deleted PKs posts in their feedback threads and then, once it went live, unceremoniously unpinned his thread and then they quietly pretended that nothing had happened. The reason why I suggested to the OP that he ask you specifically is because in the past you've always shown enough respect for the players to at least get us an answer. And we all understand that you're not in charge so even if the answer is "never gonna happen and go F yourself" I'm ok with that because at least you took the time and effort to get us the answer. Unlike others on The Council of Fourteen who spent years ignoring our requests for updated information but then one day went out of their way to give the info that we'd been asking for to MOP.

Yes. If you open a support ticket you can ask for more Mission Architect slots. My understanding is that if you're making actual story missions, and not farm missions, they'll give you more slots.

You think the forum flames are bad whenever Rage is talked about, oh boy. I can only imagine what that would be like. 🔥 😱 🔥