Excraft
-
Posts
585 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by Excraft
-
-
10 hours ago, SwitchFade said:
Already replied to a similar post.
Following up a post ascribing whining to people with another post using snarky quotes to emphasize the point you don't believe "facts" are facts is fairly acerbic, yeah?
You can find plenty of proof right here on these forums. I would help you, but as I mentioned, I'm not inclined to take your perspective seriously when your method of disseminating it uses such pointed remarks.
Right so you don't really have any facts to back up your statements. You're welcome to your opinions, but please don't try to pass them off as facts.
4 hours ago, ForeverLaxx said:Only after that happened could you perhaps say one or two people decided to blame farming outright, perpetuating the strawman and justifying your position after-the-fact.
So you're trying to call someone out on a strawman while admitting people are calling for AE nerfing and/or removal - and that somehow constitutes a strawman? I don't think you know what you're talking about here.
25 minutes ago, Darmian said:However, if it ever seems that removing AE from starting zones would somehow benefit the main game then I expect it will be seriously considered.
Removing AE from the low level zones is a non-starter. It doesn't solve the problem of attracting new players in the first place and no one has any direct empirical evidence beyond pure opinion and conjecture that it'll help with retention or that it's the cause of the declining population. Nor is there any data to show it will help with player retention.
It's fine to make the suggestion, but the idea doesn't work for a variety of reasons - all my opinion of course;
- There's no evidence AE being in the starter zones is what's causing the population decline, nor is there evidence that it isn't. Without hard data, it's a mistake to guess that's the problem invest the limited available time to removing it.
- It ignores the possibility that AE being in a convenient place can help with player retention.
- It ignores that having options for new players is a good thing.
- The idea only addresses catering to a certain type of new player and ignores the rest. Understandable since most people have difficulty seeing outside their own bubble.
- DFB and DiB runs will still be a thing which let a new player bypass early content very quickly.
- There may be new players who are into PvP and don't want to level up the old fashioned way or through story content and want to level up fast so they can enjoy the activities they like and avoid the activities they don't.
- No one is forced into joining fire farms.
- There would still be farms advertised on LFG for them to join in other zones and other zones are just a tram ride or base portal hop away.
- P2W vendors still exist starter zones (and in the tutorial) where new players have access to double XP boosters right from the start. They'll out level a lot of the early game just by using those doing normal content without ever setting foot in AE.
- The argument of "missing out on all the game has to offer" doesn't really work. By the time you hit 20, you've pretty much encountered every mission type the game has to offer. The NPCs and contacts change, the rinse and repeat activities remain the same. I know some don't want to admit it, but people do find that boring.
- The argument that using AE to power level breaks any kind of emotional investment in a character is a false assumption. See PvP players and anyone who doesn't want to level up umpteen alts through grinding story content.
I could add a lot more if I sat here a few more hours lol.
What I personally feel would help to bring in new players the most has already been brought up here in this thread; us - the community. Word of mouth can go a long way.
I have to ask, what are the people out there who feel AE farms are driving off new players doing about it? Are you investing the time in game to create teams to introduce new players to the game? Are you making posts on social media to advertise and attract new players?
I play fairly regularly and I never see anyone offering to help new players out by running them through story content. If it's really that important to you, then do something about it and do your best to make an impact.
-
1
-
1
-
40 minutes ago, SwitchFade said:
Failing to consider facts, regardless of preference, is a fallacy that has but one conclusion, finally.
New players dumped directly into the afore mentioned "zerg" paths has -and will continue to- leave a less than spectacular impression, followed swiftly by egress.
Ok. Share some of these "facts" with us then. Can you post links to empirical data from Homecoming or any of the other CoH servers showing how many of these new players came in, got insta PLed to 50 then quit because of farming? Would love to see these "facts" of yours.
42 minutes ago, SwitchFade said:You should absolutely get to enjoy the aspects of the game you currently do, WITHOUT the negative impact on new players. That's a fair and pragmatic solution for a well balanced and growing society.
You can already enjoy the aspects of the game you want to here. No ones forcing anyone into doing something they don't want to do here. Following your logic here, PvP, marketeering, RP, speed runs or whatever other play style you don't like should get removed because someone can find some negative aspect to them. Where exactly does that end?
-
3
-
-
For the people still whining about the AE and incarnates and P2W... correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a lot of this what Rebirth tried to do to be closer to what the game was on live? Last I remember, that server didn't have anywhere near the population this server one does. That should tell you something very loud and very clear about what players are looking for. Cake introduced a whole bunch of new powersets, instant 50s etc. and that's a low population too.
What's good in all of that is that there's now a variety and players can choose the style that best fits them. They can do that here too. No one forces anyone to jump into AE and farm or get double XP boosters. You can level any way you like here and that's a good thing IMO.
-
1
-
3
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:
Some would quit from any AE nerf.
Some would move on to other farming methods. DA at max diff with +3 lvl shifts is slower but can still pull in tolerable levels of inf and sidekick leveling.
Some wouldn't notice at all as they never step foot in AE.
Some would take such heavy handed idiocy as a sign to move on to one of the other CoH groups just on principle, affected or not.
Some would gloat about finally stickin it to the dirty farmers.
We're a diverse group so reactions would be just as diverse.
Personally, I think AE has been nerfed plenty already and it should be left alone for those that want 1000 lvl 50 characters. I used it the other day to get a new bio/rad/soul tank from 1 to 33 and will probably just farm him up to 50. Or maybe 40. Still annoyed I have to go bother with the patron arc to get soul mastery so maybe he'll just get deleted. Who knows?
Right, so we can agree, nerfing AE would cause even more players to leave just as I said.
1 hour ago, Shadeknight said:Teaching people takes time, especially to get them up to speed with their plans & their work mindset.
Ok and? You're making it sound like this is some kind of deterrent to bringing people on board who can help.
26 minutes ago, Nemu said:Did you miss the part where I said I PL from time to time? It's literally in what you quoted. I never said anything about nerfing AE, I literally also said that in what you quoted.
Nope, didn't miss it at all. I know thinly veiled AE nerfherding trying to hide behind virtuous intentions (aka BS) when I see it.
-
9
-
-
45 minutes ago, Myrmidon said:
I already know the reason why my suggestion would not be used, however, could you elaborate on why you believe that it’s a “very bad idea and would drive away more players”?
Sure. There's a great many people using AE to level up alts and as a primary means for inf generation. There are also a great many people who just enjoy farming. Are you suggesting that taking that away from them is going to miraculously keep them here?
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, Nemu said:
I never said anything about nerfing AE/Powerleveling and yet people dive right into this "Don't Nerf AE" rhetoric.
Let me put this into simpler language so the "DON'T NERF AE" crowd can understand.
You farming for inf, you multiboxing and PLing your own alts or you trading PLs with other farmers - I don't care. I PL too from time to time. I see nothing wrong with that.
You inviting some random newbie that just started this game to a farm to fast track them to 50 and thinking that you are being helpful - I have a problem with that thought process.
I care more about changing people's mindset about how they can help new players in their COH journey so that it's a memorable one that will keep those newbies coming back. Too often it's just power-leveling. It's not the only path and I don't believe that's the best path.
As for the fire farm for influence comment. What about teaching newbies to craft and convert IOs, how to turn merits into inf, etc... How about teaching them craft cheap builds to speed run TFs so they can rack up merits/hami-Os in a short time and turn that into profit, and then use that profit to upgrade/fund alts? Nah that requires too much effort to write and explain stuff to people new to the game right? Much easier to just let them sit on a farm, which they've already sat through for 50 levels, and further solidify in their mind that the only way to make inf or do anything in this game is through farms right?
Simple language time: There are other methods than power leveling and farming to enable and help newcomers to the game. You just need to be wiling to put in the effort. Not everyone will listen, but you will be giving those that do listen an option and the ability to choose between farming/PL vs the alternatives.
You don't need to defend AE, you don't need to write up elaborate justifications for why we should keep AE. None of that is relevant to what I'm talking about. Is that clear?
This is nothing more than a totally transparent, very thinly veiled, very poor attempt to hide behind some false sense of virtuous nobility to force others into what you feel is the "right way" to play. Just be honest, you want to nerf AE because it offends your precious sense of how the game is meant to be played. Guess what? Being offended doesn't make you right. Stop bullshitting everyone and stop trying to hide behind some false nobility here. You don't know anything about what a new player may or may not want to do with their time. Your preferred methods of earning in game funds or what activities you enjoy are good for you. They aren't what everyone else will find enjoyable and new players aren't so stupid that they won't figure things out on their own and find the paths they want to take. This game just isn't that difficult to master.
As for new players, this game launched 18 years ago. It's old. While the volunteer staff here is doing their best and are releasing new stuff, it isn't attracting new players. It doesn't have the development staff that newer games with more support, more funding, better graphics, more complex mechanics and far superior QoL options have. You aren't going to get droves of new players in here. It's wishful thinking to believe otherwise. Be happy with what you have.
On 4/23/2022 at 9:15 AM, Shadeknight said:One has to be taught how to work with certain programs/tools for example.
And what? People are stupid and can't learn how to work with them?
23 hours ago, Myrmidon said:My suggestion is to only allow AE rewards for Devs Choice content and scrub the rest. Although it would move the farmers back to Peregrine Island for the Save-A-Mission game, it would catapult AE into the quality content bracket, which is where it always should have been in the first place.
This is a very bad idea and would drive away even more players.
-
3
-
3
-
-
49 minutes ago, battlewraith said:
Lol oh no. You don't sound outraged at all.
Stop your tantrum long enough to follow the script. He asked me if I would cast it that way. I am not Disney. It's a hypothetical question.
Sorry to hear about the traumas you've suffered at the hands of Brie Larson and the like. Get some therapy.
mmmmmkkthxbai
I'm not outraged at all. I just find your insincere, totally transparent, hypocritical virtue signalling mildly entertaining at best, that's about it. I'm getting a decent laugh reading your posts, so thanks for that.
I haven't suffered any trauma from Brie Larson. I don't care about her or anything about her at all. Her movies suck. She's a terrible actress, a terrible person with zero personality and another virtue singalling transparent hypocrite like yourself. Like I said earlier, it's totally fine for woke virtue signallers to say "it's not meant for you" only for stuff they like and care about. Anyone else who says it to try and preserve their favorite IP from vandalization by woke PC crap is some sort of evil misogamist racist. That's being a hypocrite and applying those double standards that you're whining about here.
I don't need any therapy, thanks. Btw I'm not white, in a mixed race marriage and I'm definitely not a victim of white people. I absolutely don't need to see anyone who is the same gender as me or who looks like me in movies in order for me to enjoy the story and characters. I don't need or want characters recast to gender or race swap them just to appease the frail woke twitter mobs. I'm perfectly fine watching good movies with good stories and good characters that are 100% white as white can be. It doesn't bother me at all.
Anyway, this topic has pretty much been played out. You go right on trying your best to virtue signal and I'll continue to be amused by your hypocrisy. I'll wait until the fall to read about how fans are to blame when this series fails spectacularly.
-
4
-
-
12 hours ago, battlewraith said:
Woooosh! Another point goes sailing majestically over your head.
Nothing went over my head. You're still deflecting.
12 hours ago, battlewraith said:Did you have the same outrage over the MCU Thor movies? Based on what I've seen so far, it looks like that is the closest parallel to what Rings of Power is doing in terms of casting. Norse mythology doesn't indicate that there are black or Asian Asgardians. Kirby's comic book imagining doesn't either. I don't know what the reason was behind this casting. But all that mattered in the end was that they were good movies with good performances.
Deflect deflect deflect. Again everything boils down to race and the questions never get addressed. Whataboutism at its finest in avoiding the discussion. That's the problem with virtue signallers ... their thinking only goes one way, anyone who disagrees is a racist misogynist and equality and equity only ever goes one way. And for the record, I'm not outraged at anything. Amazon can cast whomever they want in whatever role they want. I'm not going to watch this crap. The showrunners blaming the fans for not liking their garbage already tells me it's not something I'll be interested in.
12 hours ago, battlewraith said:There is a cottage industry of outrage peddlers on youtube and social media. Algorithms on sites like Facebook and youtube have been shown to favor controversy in terms of searches, etc. because it drives traffic. So yeah, you can show an abundance of rage over this issue, including the cancel-culturish drive to downvote the trailers and promotional materials. I'll wait until September when the thing actually airs to try to gauge the general reaction.
Ah I see. Anyone who genuinely might dislike something is an outrage peddler. Again, PC virtue signalling at it's finest. Don't worry, you did Brie Larson proud.
5 hours ago, battlewraith said:Would I cast non-blacks as natives of Wakanda? Maybe. Depends on the script. There are reasonable narrative justifications for some additional diversity in Wakanda, particularly with the events of Endgame and the current focus on the multiverse.
Complete horseshit. There would be a global meltdown about whitewashing African culture and you know it. Disney would never risk it.
-
4
-
-
8 hours ago, battlewraith said:
You should read that interview with Christopher Tolkien I posted. He hated the Jackson movies and said they eviscerated his father's work. When given the opportunity, he would not meet with Jackson. This was the foremost authority on respecting the source material. I've been over this again and again in this thread--Jackson made significant changes to the story in order to make it entertaining and appealing to his audience. It's arbitrary and hypocritical to across the board say that similar changes cannot be made in another derivative work. Execution matters. If it's done well, it will be a success. If not, it will fail. Even if it fails it might draw in new fans to the series.
And he'd be over the moon about the changes Amazon is making? LOL! You're still deflecting.
8 hours ago, battlewraith said:To give non white actors an opportunity to take part in the project. To signal to fans that there is diversity in this world--rather than waiting on some hypothetical epic concerning the easterlings or the Haradrim that probably nobody is thinking of doing. To cater to people that would like to see a few people that look like them. We've been over this. Hearing reasons like this again is not going to sway you if it hasn't already. That has to do with your politics as much as the showrunners.
Oh come on. Where's Brie Larson to tell these people this stuff "isn't meant for them"? See, that's the problem with this PC garbage. It only ever goes one way and anyone who disagrees or questions it is some racist misogynist. If everything needs to be changed so people can feel they're seeing "people who look like them" on screen in the story or to give non-white actors out there a chance, where exactly does this end and who defines when it is or isn't appropriate to change the source material? What incentive does Hollywood have to make movies about predominantly non-white people in non-white settings if they can just arbitrarily inject diversity into existing properties when it's not supposed to be there?
Can movies like The Last Emperor be redone to include more Arabic people? Can Black Panther be redone to include more Asians? Can Shang Chi be rewritten to include more Native American representation? My politics isn't the problem here. Your politics are. None of the people in the Tolkien books, movies or animated films look like me and I don't really care and I don't need any of it changed to cater to me. I like it because it's a great story and accept the setting its in. It doesn't at all detract from the story and from me liking it. I don't look like King T'Challa, but I enjoyed his movie. I don't look like Sarah Connor or Ellen Ripley or Wonder Woman yet I really enjoyed their movies (at least the first WW one lol). I've got zero problem with including all kinds of representation where it makes sense and fits the world and story. There's absolutely nothing wrong with elves and hobbits and dwarves being white in Tolkien's world because that's the setting it's in. It's no different than Wakanda being all African because that's the setting for it. I'd be saying the same things if Disney tried to push there being tons of non-African people in Wakanda. It doesn't fit the source material.
8 hours ago, battlewraith said:People huh? Who are these people? You're not just griping about what you want are you?
Watch the video I posted above. I'm not the only one objecting to the blatant political agenda pandering. I can share a whole shitload more of them if you would like me to. There's certainly an abundance of them out there.
-
3
-
2
-
-
On 2/27/2022 at 4:37 PM, battlewraith said:
I'm not pushing for equality and equity. I'm addressing the people who have their panties in a wad about nontraditional casting of 2 characters out of what is no doubt a large ensemble cast. As has already been discussed, Jackson deviated from Tolkien's story to add more female content to the saga. If that was a success, maybe these liberties will work out as well. "But he didn't write it that way" is already true of the Jackson version.
Peter Jackson's movies were successful without the need for any "non traditional casting" of characters in his films that also had a large ensemble cast. He respected the source material. The cast worked just fine and the films raked in billions worldwide. People of all ages, races and genders had no problem enjoying the story.
If these characters in the Amazon version are so minor and no big deal, why is there a need to cast them "non tradtionally"? What's so difficult to understand people want the source material respected and kept as the author intended instead of "updatimg it for a modern audience" and caving to identity politics? All you need to do is read what the showrunners have said to address people questioning them to understand where they are coming from.
1 hour ago, battlewraith said:So casting a non-white ethnicity as a dark elf in a derivative work would be bad because.................................................why?
Aside from you not understanding the source material, why is it necessary at all? What's the harm in keeping the world the way the original author intended it? "Dark" doesn't mean dark skin in the context of the dark elves. I'll ask again, would it be a bad thing to recast Wakandan characters in Black Panther to be Arab or Asian or white? Not everyone in Africa is black, so would it be ok to show people of all colors living in Wakanda? It's ok, I already know what your answer will be. For someone who says they aren't pushing equality and equity, you're sure trying your hardest to advocate for totally unnecessary changes to the source material that support "more diversity".
Found this and thought there's a few good tidbits in here. I don't agree with all of it, but the fake "superfan" videos are a huge red flag.
-
2 hours ago, battlewraith said:
History has shown that LOTR and the Hobbit have universal appeal. It also shows that there's a generation of fans that haven't even read the books and is taking Peter Jackson's vision as cannon.
This is absolutely true and absolutely proves you're totally wrong with what you're pushing about equality and equity here. The Peter Jackson LoTR movies were huge critical and box offices successes worldwide raking in billions. They did all of that without needing to inject racial diversity in the casting. The films were a smash success without it.
2 hours ago, battlewraith said:If Kirby's Wakanda was like Tolkien's Middle Earth, Kirby's marvel stories would be set in Wakanda. The Eternals would all be dark skinned. And the Celestials would presumably all be dark skinned.
If "God" or whatever his name is in Middle Earth wanted everyone to be white, he wouldn't have created the races of men which Tolkien wrote into the story as being diverse in color. You're still not getting the point about Wakanda. There can be regions/places in fiction that are predominantly one ethnic background and that isn't a bad thing at all. It's just what the creators imagined.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, battlewraith said:
Reading comprehension? You quote me as saying it's not about demographics, then reply by talking about demographics.
You going to continue to try and deflect or are you going to answer the question?
3 hours ago, Luminara said:Does anyone want to field this one, or should we just cough loudly and give each other sidelong glances while we wait for him to check my post history and put two and two together?
I could give a hoot about you and your post history to be honest. I just find it mildly amusing someone who says they don't care about a topic comes to makes posts in a thread about the topic they say they don't care about.
-
17 hours ago, Luminara said:
Yeah, I don't really care.
LOL! Then why come here and post a long winded diatribe that no one cares about? Yeah no, fans of a property questioning changes that muck up their favorite show or book should defend themselves when they get called racists and misogynists for asking questions. Creating controversy to generate a buzz about it might be the motive, but if that's all it's got then it's a sign that the show is going to suck in my opinion.
17 hours ago, battlewraith said:The problem is that Tolkien's mythology is not simply about a certain demographic of people at a certain time. It traces back to the gods. The elves and wizards are their progeny and/or incarnations on Earth. And they are lily white. Galadriel, the elfiest of elves is both mightiest and fairest of the elves. So the question is this: does Tolkien's narrative have universal themes or is it inextricably bound this notion of a white history.
What's the problem here? It's the world the author created and the races are how he envisioned them. This isn't any different than Stan Lee and Jack Kirby creating Wakanda and setting it in Africa with all African people with thousands of years of history. It's the worlds as their creators intended. You really seem to be trying to push the race issue here. As others have pointed out, there are peoples like the Haradrim and Easterlings in LoTR. The story just doesn't focus on them as much, but they're in Middle Earth.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, battlewraith said:
Try to reason this through: how do you know that someone has respected the source material if you haven't read the source material?
By looking at the difference in what was said with regard to the different writers intent on their story crafting and writing in adapting Tolkien's work. One is clearly intending to leave their personal politics and garbage out of it. The other isn't. One is being respectful of the author and his creation. The other isn't. Watch the video again and pay attention. Whether you like it or not or agree with him or not, the man has a point.
2 hours ago, battlewraith said:"You're no more entitled to the fandom here than anyone else but you certainly sound like you should be entitled to it." Thanks? Is English your second language?
No, it isn't my second language. You're no more a fan than the next person who likes Tolkien's work and you aren't entitled to anything. Your opinion holds no more weight than the next person on the topic.
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, battlewraith said:
The funniest thing to me about that interview is that the guy talks about how great Jackson's initial trilogy was and he relates this to how Jackson intended this to be Tolkien's story. They weren't going to add any of their own baggage, etc. But then the guy admits that he's never read the books. So how the hell does he know that Jackson was faithful to Tolkien? LOL.
You completely and totally missed the mark here. Like you didn't even pay attention to what was said at all. The discussion was about the writers intent behind their changes and he's 100% spot on. His point is about respecting the source material and not injecting any of your own political garbage into it. He's got a lot more credibility as a film reviewer than you ever will for sure.
32 minutes ago, battlewraith said:I read the Hobbit and LOTR probably 2-3 times a year as a kid. Saw the Rankin Bass versions, the Bakshi version. Have seen the extended version of Jackson's multiple times at the theater and watch it with the family every year around Christmas. I try to forget that I saw the Hobbit movies. These entitled pissed off people do not own the fandom.
Neither do you. You're no more entitled to the fandom here than anyone else but you certainly sound like you should be entitled to it.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Luminara said:
Point being, what's written and what's shown can never be identical. Even if the writer is the director, set designer, cinematographer, costumer, acting out all of the parts, in absolute and unquestioned control from beginning to end, it's still going to be a different result, if for no other reason than because a novel can take days or weeks to read, whereas filmed stories are consumed in much less time. Even serials running for years can't do it, and many have tried.
Turning on the television, or walking into a movie theater, and expecting to see exactly what was in a book is just setting yourself up for disappointment. Learn to separate the two mediums. Accept that they're distinct works. You'll be a lot happier, and discover that some things you assumed were trash weren't, or were improvements on the original, or had their own creative value in some way, or even that you just liked the different takes in different ways.
I don't think anyone is suggesting or expecting any of the Tolkien works to get adapted word for word identical to the books. Yeah differences are inevitable, but it's the clear intent here that's pissing people off. That guy in the video @ShardWarrior linked above spells that out very eloquently. I'm watching some of the other videos he's done and what he's saying there about alienating your fan base is spot on.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, battlewraith said:
The point you're ignoring for the nth time is Jackson deviated from the source material in order to appeal to an audience demographic and/or make something visually dramatic. Those films were well received despite these deviations. It was a success, it did not destroy the IP despite the fact that I saw the Hobbit movies once and don't intend to watch them again. The complaint that Galadriel was never described as wearing armor or wielding a weapon is inane when you're pointing to a scene that never happened in the books to bolster the case that she works really well without armor or a weapon.
Galadriel is described as having taken part in multiple armed conflicts during the age of elves. Against other powerful elves. The idea of her strolling out on to a battlefield, unarmed and dressed like this is utterly stupid. Tolkien was writing mythology, not making movies. Anyone wanting to flesh this stuff out would do well to at least make some concessions to practicality. Elves like to shoot arrows, you know. Maybe armor would help with that. Or maybe she just disintegrates them with her mind. Or mind hacks all the archers on the other side before they can fire.
The average person in armor with a sword would never stand a chance against Boromir, lol.
I think you're willfully ignoring what people are saying to be very honest because it disproves your narrative.
What you're arguing against here isn't working the way I think you want it to. You're saying Jackson changed the story and made her using more magic instead of a weapon and it was a great success. Isn't that kind of the point for criticizing her now all of a sudden going from magic wielding ethereal elf queen to She-Ra? Yeah the elves liked to use bow and arrow and sword, but she's not an ordinary elf. If she didn't need to use weapons before and that was a raging success, what's the reason to change it up now other than woke agenda pushing? Which reading what the showrunners are posting, that's basically what it is. I don't think anyone is suggesting Jackson's films destroyed the property either so pointing that out is meaningless.
Practicality as an argument doesn't work either. You're dealing with a fantasy novel with magic rings, spell casting, elves and dwarves and giant demons.
-
1
-
-
No need to get triggered. We all know badly designed game elements are the players fault and shouldn't be fixed. 😉
-
I'm surprised the usual forum white knight brigade hasn't been in here to crap all over this idea yet or to tell you this is your fault because you can't use your mouse right.
-
No. Please stop nerfherding with this very transparent posts.
-
1
-
-
On 1/12/2022 at 1:00 PM, Apparition said:
This suggestion isn't even really my preferred solution to the problem, although it would be better than nothing. IMO, if it were up to me, I'd lower experience while in AE to 25%, lower experience while on newspaper and radio missions to 50%, and charge a ton of INF for the 50% and double XP boosters.
Translation - "The way I play is the RIGHT way to play. Screw everyone else and what they find fun. They MUST play the way I say." Charging tons of inf for stuff is something the devs here have said they absolutely will not do as all it does is drive people to goldfarmer sites to buy inf. No thank you. I have a better solution for you - play the way you like and let others do what they like.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, krj12 said:
I think creating a Heraclea npc in Cimerora should be sufficient, just to be consistent with past user memorials like Coyote in the starter zone.
Same. Hiding him away in a base just doesn't seem right to me.
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, ShardWarrior said:
Sure everyone starts with a cheap build, inside or outside of AE. I think the point was that you continue to improve your build and once you can afford a better one, you upgrade with better enhancements. At least that is how I understood it.
Correct.
-
18 hours ago, Solarverse said:
Notice the only like you got was from me? That's because they don't care. All they cared about was somebody is quitting the game and it gives them a chance to make a smart ass comment and collect a few likes/laughing faces. I'm sure they will come back to tell me how wrong I am or something, but...I won't be convinced, it's their MO.
The guy fully admitted that the majority of his issues were of his own doing. He burned himself out by playing for hours every day 7 days a week and needed a break. There's nothing wrong with that. Sorry that I don't care about someone I don't know or will ever meet leaving a game for reasons they brought upon themselves.
As for other people being pricks, I can totally empathize with him there and no one should have to be subjected to it.
Let the guy take his hiatus for a while. He even said it doesn't mean he'll never come back right in the video.
-
2
-
1
-
What Can Be Done to Recruit Players?
in General Discussion
Posted
Absolutely 100% spot on!