Excraft

February 2

21 minutes ago, Snarky said:

That's great! LOL

February 2

1 hour ago, ZemX said:

I'm not incorrect.

Yes, you are. Embarrassingly so.

1 hour ago, ZemX said:

YOU are the one who said the "HC peeps" know what's involved in fixing the problem. That's when I said these very same people are the ones who presented the name release policy in the first place, updated its terms later, spawned a whole feedback thread about it, and then actually activated the warning phase only recently. What does this tell us? Why would they be moving forward with a name release policy and asking us to discuss it (a discussion they had to know would be exactly THIS heated) if they thought this more comprehensive solution, which would make name release utterly irrelevant, was feasible/easy/imminent? That is all I am saying. Your idea that they can pull a Champions here with the name database has shown absolutely zero signs of life from the devs. COULD they be secretly working on it and just not saying anything to avoid raising hopes? Well sure. They could be doing anything. But there's no sign of it. This name release policy is what they've talked about and actually done visible things about.

@ZacKing is absolutely correct. The HC people have shared technical details on this topic in multiple threads and explained the challenges in working with the separate account and character/shard databases, the difficulties in fixing/upgrading the code to change it so that names don't need to be unique and why they chose to go with the name release code instead. That name release solution is the more simple, low hanging fruit method they are comfortable with using since they are volunteers with limited time. I'm sure there are others who have seen the same HC posts who can confirm the same things.

1 hour ago, ZemX said:

Yes, the odds are certainly "around" 1 in 3.

The odds of a single desired name even being in a list of 700,00+ to begin with isn't "1 in 3."

1 hour ago, ZemX said:

I just rebutted this "gibberish" idea a page or so ago.

You haven't "rebutted" diddly. You've provided your opinion, just like everyone else. You have as much knowledge of what is or isn't in the "inactive" name pool as everyone else does, which is none. You're guessing.

February 2

40 minutes ago, ZemX said:

It seems to be coming from your imagination actually, unless you'd like to quote someone actually SAYING these things you claim we believe.

Imagination has nothing to do with it. Of course some people are getting their hopes up that a name they want is going to get released once the policy is live. Of course there are some people who are hoping the name they want is in that 700,00+ number being tossed around. They wouldn't be vehemently arguing for enabling the job right now if they weren't. To say otherwise is being disingenuous. As for the rest, I never said anything about anyone expecting a 100% guarantee. That's you adding in nonsense that I never said. What I did say was that some (not all) people are getting their hopes up and they're likely to be disappointed. That's it. If you don't feel that's the case, good for you. I'm sure we'll have this very same discussion after the name release routine is set live and the inevitable myriad of complaint/rant posts start cropping up about the job not working right because a name someone wanted didn't get freed up for them.

February 1

3 minutes ago, ZemX said:

Why do you think so? Here is some actual educated guessing...

The post where this was mentioned is from July 2022, so obviously more names have been used (but also more names abandoned) since then. But if we look at that snapshot in time, it's mentioned:

There are over two million names in the database.

Roughly 700K are in the 1-5 level range and inactive.

"Significantly less" are in the 6-49 range and inactive.

These are fuzzy numbers obviously, but even so it's possible to estimate that at that time around 1/3 of names in the database would probably have been freed up by the policy. That means the rough odds are probably around 1 in 3 that any name you were denied back then is on an inactive character just based on this. Obviously, that's assuming no special relationship between desirable names and player inactivity. And it doesn't mean a whole string of names you tried can't all be on active characters either. This is statistics, not certainty.

Fast forward to the present, these numbers might have changed a little, but I doubt by much. Like I said, people have both come and gone since then. It's not likely the needle has moved very significantly. It could be 1 in 3 still or 1 in 4. It's not going to be 1 in 100. The inactives are a not-insignificant percentage of the total names in the database.

And this is where the false sense of hope is coming into play. People see big numbers like this and are getting their hopes up that the name they're after is going to get freed up immediately when the job is enabled. 700,000 names seems like a lot, but how many of those names are just gibberish? Nobody knows.

9 minutes ago, Captain Fabulous said:

See, they're not yours or anyone else's names. Thinking they are is why we have this problem. You don't own them, you are simply being permitted to use them. And if you're not actively using them there is no reason, other than narcissism and selfishness, that anyone would feel like they are entitled to them.

I'm confused. Aren't you saying you're entitled to a name?

February 1

15 minutes ago, macskull said:

My point was that any amount of inactivity-based name release is based on an arbitrary timeline because life happens outside the game and just because someone is gone for a while does not mean they’re going to be gone forever.

15 minutes ago, nzer said:

I think the point here is that it's not up to other players to decide what constitutes them being invested in their characters.

That's fair and I agree as everyone is going to have a different opinion on what constitutes "long enough" or when an account can be considered abandoned.

16 minutes ago, nzer said:

I would be curious to see the stats on how many failed name availability checks actually hit names that would be considered expired according to this policy.

I'd be curious to see this too. It seems to me people are seeing numbers like "700,000 + names will get released!" and thinking that the one they want will be in there. They're gambling on the hope of it being in that list and are going to be frustrated and disappointed when it isn't.

February 1

1 hour ago, UltraAlt said:

What "it is" is not reading the Code of Conduct.

Tell us something we don't know. We all know it is against the rules, that's why there's a discussion about reporting it when we see it.

February 1

46 minutes ago, macskull said:

All this talk about entitlement and you’re the one over here going “they’re not using it and I want it.”

There is zero functional difference between the name of a character that gets played every day and the name of a character that hasn’t been touched in a year.

The points I have been making, and will continue to make, are:

The name release policy purports to solve a problem that has not been demonstrated to actually exist.

The policy does not stop people from “camping” names, which is one of the stated issues.

The policy will result in existing players losing names of characters they’re invested in. How long that player has been gone for is irrelevant, as are their reasons for why they weren’t online. I don’t need to ask why they’ve been gone, because that’s none of my business, and asking why just means that suddenly I’m the one who gets to decide whether their absence from the game was for a “good” reason or not.

Items 1 and 2 are spot on. Not sure I can agree 100% with your third bullet point. If a player hasn't logged on in a couple of years, I'm not sure I'd say they're "invested in a character" they obviously haven't played in literal years. I do get where you're coming from though.

I'd add a fourth point in that the existing policy is giving a great many people what I see as a false sense of hope in that a name they're after is immediately going to be freed up and they'll be able to get it. It's setting those people up for a major disappointment when that doesn't happen and I imagine there's going to be a whole lot of complaining from people who's hopes were squashed when the existing solution didn't work as they had hoped.

Honestly, the best solution to hope for is that HC can bring on enough developers who are able to tackle this once and for all so that names aren't unique. From posts HC folk have made, they understand the issue and what it would take to fix, it's just too big a project for their limited time and small team of people to tackle. Hopefully they can bring on a good group of developers who can make that name upgrade happen as it solves all the problems once and for all of names being taken due to camping or inactivity. No one would have to see the "name is already taken" message again.

February 1

22 hours ago, Hedgefund said:

Yes this is from a content farm and reads like it, but I was amused that the article wonders if this game can "save the genre". No pressure or anything.

https://www.cbr.com/franchise-fatigue-answer-city-of-heroes/

This game isn't going to "save the genre". Not even close. Better writing and a major focus shift to quality instead of quantity will.

February 1

9 hours ago, GM Crumpet said:

If you have potentially popular names then you might, but for a lot of people they will mostly try to get back names they had on live but someone else now has.

Being honest here, this is the biggest issue with the solution you all have come up with for this in that in probably isn't going to work as well as many are hoping it will. It's not going to prevent name camping and isn't a guarantee that a name someone is after will get freed up at all. I think it's going to lead to a lot of disappointment, not from people losing names, but from those who were hoping to get one and couldn't. It appears to be giving a lot of people a false sense of hope that the name they want is going to get freed up.

I know you all have spoken about the challenges and difficulties of fixing this issue in a more permanent way that would allow non-unique names and that the existing solution was the easier route due to time and effort. However, I do hope that in the future you all consider the better, permanent solution to this issue. It would eliminate name camping and disappointment for all those who cannot get a name they would like and will not get one once the existing system goes live.

February 1

8 minutes ago, Skyhawke said:

Do we want take the risk of thinking every copyright infringement we see is an employee of " Company X"?

Honestly, do you really believe lawyers at Disney don't have anything better to be doing than logging into a 20 year old computer game being run for free looking for ways to sue? Enough with the FUD already.

February 1

3 hours ago, Skyhawke said:

So, no, playing COH and running around as XSpiderManX with a dead ringer costume will not make someone at Disney/Marvel be glad for the free advertising. It'll just make them release the hounds...on us. If any of us sound like a broken record, it's because we remember the past when Marvel came after COH on live and would rather not poke the bear.

Honestly, I truly wish people would stop with the spreading of the FUD over this whole subject and giving the impression that Disney has a team of lawyers lurking in the game 24/7 waiting to pounce and shut the game down. Marvel tried (key word being tried) to sue 20 years ago when they were in a much, much, much worse financial state than they are today. Marvel was looking for some quick cash back then because they were in a desperate financial situation. There are literally tens of millions of "illegal" skins of copyrighted Marvel, DC, Disney, Star Trek, Star Wars and just about every other IP there is for just about any computer game you can think of available for download on the internet right now. There's no flurry of endless lawsuits from Disney or Paramount or WB to remove them all. It's just not worth the time, effort and legal costs for any of them to pursue it.

With that said, it is against the rules here to make clear copyright violations of existing characters, so don't do it. If you see something, say something and let the GMs make the decision.

13 minutes ago, waltuski said:

Wasn't it some Marvel employees making Marvel characters on CoH back in the day?!

Yes, it was.

January 31

17 hours ago, Ignatz the Insane said:

Shoot, after reading your reply and rereading mine, I came off as far more aggressive than I felt while typing it. Sorry 'bout that. That post definitely was a me problem. There's a certain cadre of players who have such an intense sense of entitlement directed towards the Devs it makes my teeth hurt.

You're generally mild in comparison, but you imply a great deal about what the Devs can/should or can't/shouldn't do. You say repeatedly that you understand they are volunteers and I believe you when you say you appreciate the work they've done...but you don't seem to take into consideration their time constraints. What's their commute like, do they have a physically or emotionally demanding job, do they have a family... Running Homecoming up to now was more of a hobby than a job. Hell, not more of...it is a Hobby.

No need to apologize at all, but thank you for doing so. I didn't take any personal offense to your comment. I certainly understand your thinking here and I'm not saying you're wrong, I just think you're making quite a few assumptions about my opinion and ascribing some purposefully negative, insulting connotation to it that isn't there.

I'm basing my opinion on what the HC folk are capable of doing from the posts the folks handling the code made posted themselves, so I'm not making anything up and pulling stuff out of thin air. I'm accepting their clear expertise on the subject after reading their comments on it. I'm also not demanding anyone drop everything on work on what I demand they work on. Maybe I haven't made that opinion clear enough, so that's on me. I think @ZacKing summed things up rather well. I too think a larger project that would fix issues for everyone like unique names is a worthwhile effort, with the caveats if the HC folk are able to find enough people to help with that coding effort and if they decide its something they'd like to tackle. Again, to be clear, I'm not demanding anyone drop everything and do this instead. It's entirely up to HC to decide what to work on. I'm just offering a point of view expressing that I believe that's a worthwhile project for the long term. You're of course welcome to disagree.

I'll reiterate that I understand they're a volunteer group who are doing this as a hobby. I'm not demanding anyone turn this into a full time job and burn themselves out. I'm not sure where or why some folk here are reading that into it. Just as you call out the small cadre of people who have a clear sense of entitlement, there's also (sadly) a very large cadre of people who want to jump all over and attack anyone who may express any thought that runs counter to or is in any way, regardless of how minor, critical of anything the HC folk do. Both those are extreme positions though and I think most people fall somewhere in the more reasonable middle.

January 30

1 minute ago, Nuc said:

Volunteer is not the same thing as "not professional". Plenty of professionals volunteer their time and skills with charities for example, the fact that they're volunteers makes their work no less professional. Try finding your nearest volunteer fireman and tell him he's not doing a professional job, let me know how you get on.

I'm not the one who suggested that they're not professionals and couldn't handle larger scale projects.

2 minutes ago, Nuc said:

Unless they have enough resources to fully resource every single change they want to make simultaneously then yes, allocating resources to a difficult/tricky (your words, not mine) change like character names mean that other projects have less to work with. It's basic logic/maths.

Aren't they actively looking for more people who can work on development? This may be true for now, but it doesn't mean larger scale things cannot be taken on in the future. Again, I think you're selling the HC team very short.

January 30

7 minutes ago, Oubliette_Red said:

I equate most of the "should be no problem to programs" posts I've in various threads as "I'm not a doctor, but...".

I may be misremembering (I have a hard time recalling last week, much less 2 decades ago) but originally, back in Legacy I believe it had to do with how global names impacted/interacted with accounts and/or billing. While there is no longer billing, the rewrite for the code revolving around globals/accounts may be a bigger pita than it's worth at this point. ¯\_ (ツ)_/¯

Out of curiosity, have you ever read any of the posts from the HC folk about the technical aspects of that topic?

January 30

35 minutes ago, Ignatz the Insane said:

How are you in any position to agree or disagree about what the Devs can or cannot do? You think they can manage it just fine you say. How the heck do you know? Because it's your opinion?

Well for starters, I can agree or disagree with changes being made to the game since I'm an individual with my own individual tastes, just like you and just like everyone else. Second, yes, it is my opinion the folks here can take on and handle larger projects if they chose to do so. Just read through some of the more technically oriented threads any of the HC folk working in the code have posted over the years and you'll see quite clearly they have a very good understanding of how things work. I'd even go so far as to say they know it better than the original developers did. Given their knowledge, experience and understanding of some of the more complicated issues the game engine has, I do think they have the talent and skill to take on larger projects and make major changes and code upgrades if they chose to do so. I'm not in any way saying they must do those things and I am in no way dictating what they should or should not work on. Most all of the stuff they've accomplished over the years has been wonderful and I'm very thankful they've devoted so much time and effort into it. Their hard work and dedication is truly appreciated. That doesn't mean I agree with or like every change that's been made and as far as I'm aware, we're all allowed to express our opinions here if we don't care for something. If you don't think anyone should question anything or be allowed to post anything other than lavish praise, petition the HC GMs to change the forum rules to allow "praise and affirmations only".

40 minutes ago, Ignatz the Insane said:

Your arguments are pointless and self-centered, filled with conjecture based on what you want and what you expect. There's a kind of hubris to your posts...like you deserve the changes you want, and the Devs are there to serve your desires.

No idea where you're getting any of that from as I never said anything of the sort. I'm certainly not demanding anything of anyone at HC. Your misrepresentation of my posts are definitely more a you problem than a me problem. Your post seems like you're looking to start an argument for the sake of starting an argument for the sake of arguing. Thanks, but no thanks. Not interested.

January 30

7 minutes ago, Nuc said:

I never said anything about the merits of changing how character names work (for the record I'd much prefer the CO naming system) I was originally replying to a comment along the lines of "they said it's difficult, not impossible" by pointing out that just because it's technically possible it doesn't necessarily follow that it's feasible given the available resources.

They are actively looking for more developers.

January 30

11 hours ago, Glacier Peak said:

That's load balance, so what? Indomitable runs fine, server transfers are free. The game is flourishing as it never has in the past five years. Just this month they've made clear they're selecting improved servers for the increase in players across the more populated shards (I can link that if you're curious).

I've read that thread already, thanks. Perhaps you might want to give it another read though, especially the post where it says there's a chance (albeit a small one) the issue won't be resolved by more hardware alone. So yeah, maybe looking at doing some code architecture improvements are worth it.

17 hours ago, Nuc said:

By all means, please point out where I said they weren't professional.

You've essentially said they're a volunteer staff and can't take on large(r) projects due to manpower. I disagree. I think they can manage it just fine as they look to have a firm grasp of the code and architecture of the game. I'm not suggesting stuff like new costumes, powersets and such should be put on hold completely in favor of larger scale back end code improvements. Just my opinion. Feel free to disagree.

January 29

3 hours ago, Nuc said:

Yes, Cryptic did solve this issue a long time ago. But we have no idea a) how difficult it was and b) how long it took. And they had the full resources of a professional game development studio at their disposal. As for "nonsense" like the Team Diversity Bonus, I'd imagine that was pretty low-hanging fruit (if I had to guess I'd say the Kheldian inherent could have provided the framework for it) and recycling existing powers is much easier than creating new stuff entirely from scratch.

Well from everything we've seen here over the past few years, the HC folk are able to turn out all kinds of new stuff and improvements, so your saying they aren't "professional" enough or lack the talent/skills/knowledge to make larger changes is demonstrably false. Again, from what I understand based on comments from the HC folk, the stuff I mentioned isn't impossible for them to do. Tricky/difficult yes, impossible no. Also, as I understand it - and I could very well be wrong - but the tools to add in brand new animations and such to create brand new powersets with unique animations and such no longer exist.

3 hours ago, Nuc said:

And as has been pointed out, these are volunteers, we take what we get and are thankful that the game even exists at all. Alternatively, the source code is freely available, knock yourself out if you're not happy.

I think you missed this part of my post. Here, I'll re-post it for you and increase the font size a bit for you to make it easier for you to read.

5 hours ago, Excraft said:

I know they're volunteers doing this in their free time and I appreciate their dedication and hard work, just like everyone else.

Let me know if you need further clarification. Thanks.

5 hours ago, jprewitt73 said:

That has never been a stated goal of anyone volunteering their time nor should it be. This is a 20+ year old game that we are just lucky to have and play for fun and to play for free.

I seem to recall otherwise. I'll try to locate the posts, but I distinctly remember there being a stated desire to bring in new players and grow the game.

5 hours ago, Glacier Peak said:

This is a joke, right? 😆 🤣 😂

Sadly no. I'm sure you're aware of why Double XP and Rikti Raids were enabled on other less populated servers to prevent Excelsior from crashing and collapsing. I can link to the HC post about it though if you aren't aware.

January 29

12 hours ago, Ironblade said:

Okay, so you have your priorities. Sadly, I do not think they match the priorities of the 100% volunteer dev team who, pretty much, work on WHAT THEY FEEL LIKE.

They don't have the manpower to "grow and evolve" the game and they're not getting paid. The goal is not to compete with more modern games. This game is free. The goal, as far as I can tell, is to make gradual improvements. A major overhaul is simply wishful thinking

You're not telling me anything I or anyone else already doesn't know and hasn't been repeated over and over and over again. I know they're volunteers doing this in their free time and I appreciate their dedication and hard work, just like everyone else. From my understanding on a couple of the topics I mentioned, based on HC folk comments, they're difficult/tricky, but not impossible to do. Who knows what they may be able to do with more volunteers they have been actively recruiting? The game is struggling as it is with the small number of players it has at the moment. If the goal is to grow the game and the playerbase, something has to be done to attract and keep people who are more used to the QoL features that exist in every other MMORPG on the market.

January 28

On 1/18/2024 at 10:35 PM, BrandX said:

Didn't she, in the end, try to help tho? That said, I will agree, in the second season, not as likable.

Not as I remember it, but admittedly I started tuning out whenever she was on screen. I just don't like her character and her extreme narcissism at all.

January 28

On 1/17/2024 at 8:36 AM, Nuc said:

Very few things in software development are downright impossible, given enough time and resources, that doesn't mean they're all worth doing. Especially when you're working with limited resources, return on investment becomes a major factor. So yeah, it's certainly possible but what else gets pushed to one side in the meantime?

How is the game going to grow and evolve to compete with more modern games if it doesn't? If you ask me, nonsense like "team diversity bonuses" and recycling of powersets ad nauseam can pushed very far to the back of the line in favor of things like account based storage and properly correcting unique character name issues. Again, Cryptic had corrected this problem in their second generation engine a long time ago.

January 17

3 hours ago, lemming said:

Don't hold your breath too long. Since the devs did answer why this would be a difficult thing to do. (Pretty sure you weighed in on that thread way back when)

Never said I was holding my breath, and yes, the HC folk said it would be difficult, not impossible. Their simple and easy fix was the lackluster "name release policy". Were they to tackle issues such as this to really bring the game up to speed with modern games, tracking and releasing names would be a non-issue.

January 17

1 hour ago, Glacier Peak said:

Can you go ahead and name any other entertainment product run by volunteers, free to play, updated at all (let alone after the property was sunsetted or with the steady frequency of page releases here on Homecoming), and has more than two people playing it?

Having played them both within the last week, Star Trek: Armada and Star Trek: Bridge Commander come to mind. Its not like HC is unique in this respect.

January 16

17 hours ago, mcbraggart said:

I just found out this was a thing. I played when the game first launched and now when I'm trying to recreate my first character, the name is already taken.

This is something that I sincerely hope gets corrected in the future - names being unique. Cryptic changed this in their next generation engine after CoH. They're going to have to do something about this if they want the game to evolve.

January 16

3 hours ago, Bionic_Flea said:

I can understand your position, but they could have pulled out plug anytime over the last few years before granting us the license. What makes you think that it is more likely that they will pull the plug on us now vs. before? If anything, I think the unlicensed ones would be hit first. And finally, the code is out there. Anyone with the knowledge and desire can make a CoH server. If NCSoft suddenly starts issuing cease and desist letters or formal lawsuits they will find themselves playing wack-a-mole.

55 minutes ago, OmegaX123 said:

NCSoft could always shut any of the rogue servers down. It's called a Cease and Desist Order. Now that HC is officially supported and licensed it's less likely that they will.

It's always been very unlikely that NCSoft would shut anyone down or pursue legal action against any of the pirate servers. Aside from the bad PR it would cost them, it makes perfect sense given the solid reasons @Bionic_Flea points out above - especially that the code is out there now. Shut down one pirate server and another (or more) will crop up to take its place. It's a costly proposition to try and legally go after all of the pirate servers out there. Why would NCSoft bother with that hassle and expense? Instead they drew up a standard "license" agreement (which I have no doubt they will in turn charge a fee for in the future) and have any of the pirate servers sign it if they want to be declared a "licensed" server. Instead of a legal expense, a dead IP can be used to make a few bucks for NCSoft without NCSoft lifting a finger or costing them a dime. Smart move on NCSoft's part. Also, the NCSoft name and logo are still associated with the game, so its free advertising for them. Win win for NCSoft.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Store

Articles

Patch Notes

Posts posted by Excraft