PeregrineFalcon

March 20

1 hour ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

Your complaint pre-dated my arrival.

Yes. As I said, I haven't had an issue with your moderation and most of the issues that I've had with moderation predate you.

1 hour ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

Edit to add: I would be more disposed to take GM action if you were insulting other players vs insulting some outside group.

Right. So in the example I gave the post likely wasn't moderated because it wasn't directed at a specific person. However, in the post that you recently warned someone about in this thread that insult was also not directed at a specific person. But one resulted in nothing, despite being reported, while the other resulted in you warning the poster (and possibly taking action if he doesn't edit his post).

So like I said, selective enforcement.

By the way, thank you for making this thread and for discussing this issue with us.

March 20

9 minutes ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

It's not OK to be insulting to anyone. But, I'm sorry, neckbeards doesn't register as an insult to me. Maybe I'm just not versed in Urban Dictionary.

Almost any word that's clearly used as a pejorative in the context of the sentence is an insult. And neckbeard isn't a new term. It's been used as an insult online for over 20 years. Also, even Wikipedia agrees that it's an insult.

I'm bringing this up not because I want action applied retroactively, but because I want to prove that selective enforcement has been a thing on this forum to people who continue to refuse to believe it. Thank you for confirming that.

March 20

12 minutes ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

Calling people names on the forums is one way to get moderated.

This is a perfect example of the selective enforcement issue that I, and others, have been complaining about.

There are several posts that I've reported where someone referred to people who don't share their taste in movies as "neckbeards." A term that is also insulting. And yet those posts are still there, completely unmoderated.

So why is it that it's ok to insult some groups of people but not others?

March 18

3 hours ago, tidge said:

#1 I believe that the forum moderation is too slow to recognize and/or call out certain negative/bad-faith behavior, with a corollary that sometimes the hammer falls on folks who call out the negative/bad-faith behavior.

Agreed.

And I guess that a TL;DR version of my last post is that: I don't care how strict or how lax the rules are. Just as long as they're 1) Specific, and; 2) Applied equally to everyone. As I'm sure you've noticed I don't believe that #2 has ever happened and that is the source of about 99% of my issues with the moderation on this forum.

March 18

58 minutes ago, Col. Kernel said:

If preventing the casualties is the only option I'm limited to Thermal, Cold, FF, and Sonic secondaries, or Robotics primary. That means that, for the sake of keeping myself sane, I don't get to play all the other wonderful secondaries the devs have created.

There are other options that allow you to keep your pets alive while also not using just the more defensive secondaries. Of those options my favorite is to team up with a Tank or a Brute and let them draw aggro before ordering my NPC minions to attack.

March 18

6 minutes ago, Col. Kernel said:

But to have one secondary (or 2 if you count Sonic) that fixes a flaw in the AT design while snubbing the others seems unjust.

It's not a design flaw, it was done on purpose.

You can take a secondary like /dark or /poison that includes powers that do damage and increase your damage output, or you can take /Son or /FF, which focus more on defense.

March 18

On 3/14/2025 at 1:59 PM, kwsapphire said:

A lot of people seem to feel that way, and this very thread is a request to make them slightly less terrible, so.. yes? 😄

So here's the problem.

If the devs take any steps to make MMs minions more durable, a subject that was very popular last year, it essentially ruins the /Sonic and /FF secondaries. Making the upgrades faster, or making them automatic or passives, has much the same effect. Sure, it doesn't keep them alive longer, it just makes replacing them quick and painless. Either of those two things changes the MM game play loop and increases the MMs DPS.

If you don't want to be constantly resummoning and/or upgrading your minions then take action to keep them from dying. Place them in a spot that makes them less vulnerable to the enemy, give them inspirations, heal them, take the /Sonic or FF secondaries to make them tougher, team up with a tank, etc.

There are a lot of ways you can make your minions more durable, and prevent from having to constantly resummon and upgrade them, other than just asking the devs to buff them.

March 18

Ok, so first of all, for what it's worth, I'm not unhappy with your moderation.

Since this forum started the moderation has vacillated between "draconian snowflake protection program" and fairly reasonable. There were instances where people making perfectly reasonable requests that a certain troll be stopped were ignored while people who pushed back and called the troll a troll were suspended. Members of the DDL would routinely and blatantly insult some forum posters, while those of us who "returned fire" as it were saw our posts deleted, and watched during our temp bans while the DDL continued to post, clearly and obviously immune from any repercussions. This situation was the source of the accusations of toxic positivity.

Worse was what happened in feedback threads started by the devs asking for feedback. Negative feedback received wave after wave of attacks by the DDL and, once we were finally baited into responding, we would again be temp banned, and our posts deleted, while the DDL would continue to assault other posters unabated. Since the mods were continuing to break in favor of those screaming ". . .leave the poor devs alone. . ." it appeared to many of us that this was what the devs/Homecoming administration wanted.

I won't even go into how a developer lied to me, claiming that no one had disagreed with a change that had been added to the game and, as proof, offered a link to a thread that had already been heavily edited to remove all of the push back against said change. And I also see no to reason to go into my temp ban that was a result of my recommending to another poster that he seek professional medical help except to say that that one in particular still burns me up whenever I think about it.

I think the worst part of it all is the blatant gaslighting that's happened over the last year or two since moderation has calmed down and become fairly reasonable. The claims from the usual suspects, themselves mostly former members of the DDL, that none of this ever happened and that I'm completely exaggerating how bad it was is just aggravating. But that's forum posters themselves, not moderators.

But, as I said, that all happened before you became a moderator. Since you've been a mod I can't really remember having any major issues with the moderation here. And I'm not saying that because you've never sanctioned me, because in fact you have. My last warning point in September was from you, and I don't remember exactly why, but I do recall thinking at the time "yeah ok, I probably shouldn't have posted that."

I will say though, that in that recently locked thread I was able to screenshot a post that was deleted that clearly didn't break any rules. I'm not going to ask what happened. I'll just point out that when things like that happen it makes us wonder if the snowflake protection program is about to be reactivated.

March 16

Just now, Forager said:

Lol ok I thought I was trippin...

Nope. You saw it too, didn't you? I hope you got screenshots as I did.

It seems really weird to me that the moderators are deleting posts that aren't insulting anyone and don't break the rules in anyway. And I wonder if they even realize that by doing that they're literally proving my point for me.

March 16

Captain America Four is Officially a Flop

March 16

4 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

This is a perfect summation of all these discussions.

No it isn't.

That link was posted in an effort to insult those of us who are insisting that toxic positivity is or was a problem in this community. This was posted in order to frame us as immature, angry, children who are screaming at the devs, when the truth is that we're adults who are simply and calmly discussing this situation. You just don't like what we have to say, and rather than discuss the points you're attacking the character of the people on the other side of the argument. That's the Ad Hominem logical fallacy.

Don't worry though. The moderators are quietly helping you out by deleting certain posts in this thread that don't actually violate the rules. So hey, at least they're on your side.

March 15

35 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

. . .that nuke is not going to make a damn bit of difference. . .

I agree with you.

The only reason that I disagree with your suggestion is because, as I said before, I believe that it would be a lot of coding work for the devs and ultimately it would not make a damn bit of difference. I hope you can understand why I think that if the devs are going to spend that much time coding that it should be for something that does make a big difference.

March 14

10 minutes ago, GM Crumpet said:

As long as it's polite we welcome negative feedback as well as positive. We mess up, we put our hands up and try to make it right. somethings broken? We try to fix it. You think our CoC and rules are too restrictive? We'll happily have a debate. There are reasons for a lot of our rules. Some are obvious, some we can't discuss. The only thing we are very intolerant about is rudeness.

No, I don't think the CoC is too restrictive. I think the selective enforcement of it, which was far more blatant a few years ago when the forum was still new, has left quite an impression on me. And I think that selective enforcement is what allowed the toxic positivity to be such a big problem back then.

But, as I said in a different post, most of those folks have calmed down so it's not much of an issue anymore.

March 14

2 minutes ago, arcane said:

(2) Okay, so maybe it can exist. But perhaps, if toxic positivity really exists, we can prove it with receipts rather than smear with insinuations. If posters are just going to use this term as a baseless insult rather than an argument, I’d say the term is still bullshit in this case.

Oh it exists alright, and you know it does. And you know that I, of all people on this forum, can bring receipts. And you also know how long I'll be banned from the forum if I do.

But, as I said, it's died down quite a bit in recent years.

March 14

21 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

That makes playing a mastermind sound so attractive lol.

It's part of the challenge of playing a Mastermind. It's also why my two favorite MMs are /FF, so that I'm not having to constantly resummon my minions.

Personally I think it's a good thing that the various ATs are so different, there's an AT out there for everyone.

March 14

9 minutes ago, lemming said:

I've regarded "toxic positivity" with stuff like "I don't want to hear a problem unless you have a solution" type things. Or just think good thoughts and the problems go away type stuff.

"Toxic Negativity" is a relatively new term. It means constant negativity which can end up driving people away from the forums and the game. "Toxic Positivity" was a term that was coined later to push back against that, and it basically means what you'd think it means. Constant positivity which can end up driving people away from the forums and the game. Yes, I'm sure most of you already knew this but, based on some of the posts I've read in this thread so far, clearly some of you do not.

I've been on forums, and subreddits, where players attacked other players for having the unmitigated gall to post a bug report. Wherever there's a group of players who constantly attack anyone who has anything negative to say about the game, even when it's valid criticism, that's toxic positivity. The kind of over the top, constant defense of the devs and the game, even when it's clearly unwarranted, and especially when that poster never criticizes the game or the devs, ever. That kind of crazy, and obviously disingenuous, behavior aggravates people and drives them away. That's why it's "toxic", because it poisons your community.

And no, toxic positivity is not disagreeing with suggestions that are hot garbage "I think the devs should give everyone a free nuke that recharges every 15 seconds!", it is being attacked by a dozen posters when you post "I'd like to see the devs fix this bug" or "I was on the test server, and here's why I don't like this change. . ." When it happens all the time and it's always the same group of people that's when it drives people away from your community, and that's when it's toxic.

And yes, that used to happen a LOT on this forum. Fortunately, most of those folks have calmed down quite a bit, so I wouldn't say it's much of an issue here anymore.

March 14

1 hour ago, Col. Kernel said:

I would appreciate it. Every post I've found someone says the devs won't implement this idea, but I haven't found a post with a dev comment yet.

Well, I got lucky. I expected to spend nearly an hour searching for it, especially since I couldn't remember who said it or when.

On 3/13/2021 at 2:17 PM, Number Six said:

There's a lot of text here, but I can save you all a lot of time and back and forth.

We considered making upgrade powers auto a while back (9-12 months) because it was a player suggestion that had come up a few times, but ultimately ruled it out. The reason was that there has to be some opportunity cost to give the player an incentive to try and keep their pets alive. If you want to get them back up to full strength, you have to spend extra time not using your secondary powers to do it.

So while the changes on beta are intended to make life a little less painful when they do die, the intent is not to make it trivial to have an infinite supply of full-strength pets out.

Here's a weird coincidence. When I posted yesterday that the devs had already said that, it was four years to the day after he'd said it.

March 14

2 hours ago, arcane said:

Yeah I read the article after I made that initial post. Essentially people that use the term are frustrated that the game in question isn’t conforming to their every whim, so, in their frustration, they use this term to slander the majority of the player base. Pretty disgusting shit.

That's not what 'Toxic Positivity' means.

It's what you've seen me refer to as the "Dev Defense League." That group of players who defend the devs with the fervor of a long unrequited crush, and will attack and insult people who post any kind of negative feedback even when we're giving feedback in the feedback thread started by a dev asking for feedback. They insist that everything's perfect or, if it's not, then it certainly isn't the dev's fault and how dare you bring up anything that's anything less than 100% worship of the devs. Don't you know that making games is hard? The devs are unpaid volunteers and you get to play the game for free so how dare you!

You get the idea. And you know who I'm talking about.

March 14

Unfortunately, the Homecoming developers have already said that they will not make the upgrades passive. I think that summoning and resumming and upgrading is part of the intended gameplay loop.

I suppose I could go find the post if you really need me to.

March 13

41 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

Once again, you assert that this will break the game without offering any justification for how that would happen. Nobody would make you do this mode. Nobody would force you to play this mode.

Ok, let me give you my opinion, for what it's worth.

If your mode were created by the devs, I'd roll a EM/Shield Scrapper. By level 4 I'd have Total Focus, Energy Transfer, and the mez toggle. This would clearly make my character far more powerful than any current character at level 4. It'd be hilarious, but would it really make a difference though? Well, Posi run times would probably decrease drastically. People would have some crazy OP builds in Bloody Bay. We'd run some missions faster, for the hour or two we spend under level 20. That's it.

The truth is that we already spend so little time below level 20 that I don't think it'd make any meaningful difference in truth, but it certainly could in perception. It's very possible that, the early game at least, could change drastically in ways we can't foresee and that could affect the attitude of the players and the perception of the game as a whole. I'm not sure how, but if I could figure it out then it wouldn't be unforeseen.

I'm sorry if you're frustrated because people don't agree with your suggestion. All I can say is, I'm not disagreeing with your suggestion just to be a jerk, I honestly believe it would be a ton of work for the devs in return for no positive benefits. That's not your fault, and it doesn't mean you're dumb or a bad person, and it doesn't even mean it's a bad suggestion. It just means that I disagree with it. That shouldn't really matter to though, I'm not a dev. I'm nobody.

TL;DR: I think doing something like this would be an incredible amount of work for the developers in return for very little positive effect and a possible very negative effect.

March 13

1 hour ago, Excraft said:

On 3/12/2025 at 5:18 AM, ZacKing said:

Not only that, how does the shield bounce off things and ricochet on command? Vibranium is supposed to absorb kinetic energy... so why doesn't it absorb the kinetic impact of being slammed into something?

It's all in the wrist. 🤣

It's my theory that Cap's shield isn't actually made from Vibranium, they just tell everyone that for OPSEC.

I believe that it's actually made out of a new, very special and hard to make, alloy called Bullshitium. So it does whatever bull shit the wielder wants it to.

March 11

I like your idea. If for nothing else it'd be a new experience. However, I do have a question about this:

6 hours ago, battlewraith said:

To make lower level content palatable again for veteran players that are used to using IO builds that don't gas out constantly.

What do you mean by 'gas out'? Are you talking about running out of Endurance? I ask because in your initial proposal you mentioned that these 'Saga Mode' characters would not be able to use crafted enhancements. Without crafted enhancements I don't see how these characters, especially at low level, won't be constantly running out of Endurance.

March 10

9 hours ago, Super Atom said:

This threads only purpose is to watch PF and Arcane hiss and swipe at each other.

And my issue isn't with Arcane, obviously. It's with what was said, and I've seen many others post something similar, in case my post didn't make that clear. My issue is that I want Homecoming to stay around for a long time.

Look, Homecoming doesn't have that many players, on Friday evenings it's usually up to what? 5k or so? Just because Concord wished they had that many players doesn't mean that's a big number. When that number gets near zero Homecoming will likely cease to be. That will happen eventually, and I want to delay that day for as long as possible.

Every person that gets chased away because someone on the forum, in or game, tells them to go play on another server, reduces Homecoming's lifespan by an unknown amount. And I've seen that these things tend to snowball. People start leaving and then more people leave because people are leaving. Chasing people away is bad for Homecoming. How bad? I don't know because I cannot foresee the future. But I'll ask all of you. If you want Homecoming to stay up for a long time then isn't it in your best interest to not chase players away?

March 9

52 minutes ago, arcane said:

Who the fuck do you think you’re talking about? I have never reported you or called you a meanie, and I consider you one of my favorite posters here overall.

"You lot" is a phrase that is plural, similar to "you all." In other words I was referring to the people on the forums, not to just you specifically.

52 minutes ago, arcane said:

As for the first part of your post, they’re kinda already on the way out, no?

I suppose, but why would you work to ensure that with a condescending post?

Look, Homecoming's major draw is its population. Also, Homecoming relies on donations to keep going. So, encouraging people to leave with a condescending post, like you did, does not benefit Homecoming, you, or the person you're responding to. So I'm asking why you would do that. Is that too difficult a question to answer?

March 9

2 hours ago, arcane said:

Have fun on T-Spy and don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

Please explain to me how condescendingly telling players to leave benefits you or Homecoming?

You know, you lot sure cry a whole lot of "Peregrine's a big meanie" and speed-hammer the report button on my posts, but they you'll hypocritically post condescending garbage like this. I'm disappointed Arcane, you're smarter than this.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Events

Store

Articles

Patch Notes

Posts posted by PeregrineFalcon