UltraAlt

So I've been trying to figure out what the heck is going on with the damage "strength?" descriptors. I had always just taken it for granted that "Light" was less damage than "medium" or "moderate", that "medium" or "moderate" was less than "heavy" or "high", and "heavy" or "high" was less than "superior" or "extreme" damage. I don't see listing of what these "strength?" descriptors actually mean. I tried to look on the wiki, but nothing relevant came up. I don't know if it is the points of damage it does per hit or some other trait that would give it one descriptor over another. It seems to vary from power set to power set and even sometimes within a power set. Anyone know anything about this? Is there a list of all these descriptors somewhere that also indicates what they mean (kind of like the breakdown of damage types [lethal, toxic, dark, etc.])?

Update failed twice while using the Homecoming launcher. Third time was the charm. I've never had the Homecoming launcher fail to update the first time before.

Gratz! Maybe seeing you around in one mask or another. I run around on Reunions sometimes.

Previously, the group fly was not as fast as fly. Heck, it wasn't even as fast of a fly as the player that had group fly powered up. This is in the new update/patch ::

Support classes are extremely powerful when they work in conjunction with each other. Defenders powers already change and scale based on the number of players on a team. I can see your point if the player is running solo. So I could agree with this caste on-self mechanic when solo as a Controllers/Corruptor only or if scaling/changing like defenders powers do. (I don't consider Dominators or Masterminds to be a support class)

I try to never use a respec unless I'm forced to by game changes.

I was replying to you asking "why should I care?" I answered with a snarky response to what I felt was a snarky response. I care about what other people are doing and feeling because I care about what other people are doing and feeling. That isn't something that is simply game based. I try to care about and respect other people. Put yourself in someone else's shoes. You take the time to recruit for a task force. You expect to gain 5 or levels. Someone says give the highest level character to the team the star. Someone(s) else chimes in to do it. You relinquish the star due to peer pressure. The new team leader turns it into a speed task force and you get 1 level out of it. How do you feel?

But their often is coercion going on. When someone else chimes in that the star should be passed, it becomes intimidation.

It punishes the lower level players as they don't have access to the equivalent powers and slots that they would have if they were fighting enemies at their own level (ie if they are level 8 and running a task force at level 8, the enemies would be based relative to level 8. level 50 runs and caps the level to let's say 15, the level 8 has the slots powers and slots of level 8, but fighting against enemies based relative to level 15).

I am correct in their motives in my experience. You haven't had the experience I have had. You have no authority to declare me wrong. Somehow you are leaving out the point that by increasing the level of the team that it allows those higher level players to have access to more powers and how it affects the lower level players on the team. It is an personal advantage for them to raise the level in order to grants them access to more powers; this is not a team benefit. It does not give the lower level players an advantage. In fact, it punishes the lower level players as they don't have access to the equivalent powers and slots that they would have if they were fighting enemies at their own level (ie if they are level 8 and running a task force at level 8, the enemies would be based relative to level 8. level 50 runs and caps the level to let's say 15, the level 8 has the slots powers and slots of level 8, but fighting against enemies based relative to level 15). My recruiting for a team to run a +2/2 XP task force was getting turned into a 0/0 speed task force - pretty much every time for a while. The 50's tend to be doing task forces for the merits alone. So that does negatively impact the reason that I was recruiting players for the task force (and probably the reason that all those that weren't above the level of the task force were taking part in it - that is to say, they were looking for the XP on a team and not the merits alone). Taking my intent for recruiting and changing that to fit their motives is team stealing as far as I am concerned; so it is not wrong that it is team stealing as far as I am concerned (and probably others that didn't want this to happen to them when/if it did). But, yeah, at this point I simply tell them that I'm not going to give them the star. They can leave if they want and I'll find some more players to run with that have the same goal.

A brave new step forward. Nothing that breaks the game. Looks like fun.

So you are reference what appear to be bugs in task forces that need to be addressed and have indicated that some of them have already been addressed. No one is bound to anything in the game except by friendship, honor or a doggedness to find away to overcome hardship.

They are trying to take the team. I am the OP. Trying to get someone to hand over the star and the doing what they want with the team is team stealing.

Not true. That's your opinion. The levels scale so if you run at a lower level, the enemies are scaled down to that level as well - so you don't need the powers you think you are missing in most cases.

Because I'm not a sociopath or a psychopath.

I know that you all have seen it. There are far more people that will join a team rather than trying to recruit one. There are far more team leaders that will only lead a team if they know the people on the team (on their friends list). I've always wondered why people are so hesitant run/recruit/lead PUGs (Pickup groups). What is the fear of the Star?

what? You've never been on a team where someone that is below level 50 was running the team and a level 50 comes on the team and insists that they are given the star because they want to have access to more of your powers? I see this kind of behavior all the time. It's obnoxious.

I know that you all have seen it. There are far more people that will join a team than will run one. There are far more team leaders that will only lead a team if they know the people on the team. I've always wondered why people are so hesitant to try try to use the LFG to recruit. What's the worse that can happen? 1) No one joins No big loss. Try again later on or at another time. 2) A player joins and then quits Oh, well. Their loss. Or you didn't make it clear enough what your team was going to be about doing. 3) You recruit a jerk. Put them on ignore and/or kick them from the team if you really have to. 4) You are trying to get a Event, Taskforce, etc going and not enough people join It happens. I usually don't give it more than 10 minutes. Many don't even want to sit around doing nothing for that long, and I really don't blame them. When people recruit, they generally have the same kind of format. [what will the team be doing]. [What level of characters am I looking for]. send tell for invite. LF#M (looking for # more - where # = the number of players you are looking for) Some people abbreviate things. I think that's a bit snarky, but to each their own. By writing it out you will attract more players. example of initial messages :: Citadel TF. level 25+. send tell for invite. Hollows mission team. Level 10 - open to all. Send tell for invite Example of follow up messages when team size is 8 and currently have 5 on team :: Citadel TF. level 25+. send tell for invite. LF3M Hollows mission team. Level 10 - open to all. Send tell for invite. LF3M taskforces, events, etc. close so you can't recruit, but normal mission/streets-sweeping teams can keep recruiting until full and recruit again when you team empties out. When running a normal mission/street-sweeping team, I wouldn't send a recruit message more than once every 5 minutes or so. I know there are plenty of players that solo or are busy marketing, slotting, leveling, making bases, etc., but I do think that the game and community is stronger when we have more people actively recruiting so that new players have skilled players to game with .... and I'm not talking about recruiting for farms and power-leveling a new player (I personally think this is detrimental to the game, the community, and the new player's gaming experience and longevity in the City). I'm talking about recruiting for teams that are going to run taskforce and missions with the goal of leveling up, creating a challenge, creating a learning group, and, of course, have fun. So sometimes you also need to make it clear when running a taskforce, event, etc if it is going to be a Speed/stealth or for XP. If you state it up front, no one should complain. They know what they are getting into and should respect that the leader is recruiting for that - and that that leader has taken the time to do the recruiting for that team. I think is pretty much being a jerk to get recruited to at TF and then asking for the star because you are the 50. Want the star? Do the recruiting yourself. Don't steal the star from the person that had the motivation to recruit and did (what apparently is) the hard work of recruiting the team. This kind of behavior - team stealing - will stop some that had tried to recruit from trying to recruit in the future. I'm not going to say that I always recruit when I'm on. I don't. But I do try to fill my teams when I do run teams. Everyone enjoys the game in their own way. That is a good thing. I love this game and want to share that enjoyment with the other players in the CITY.

Are you trying to slot the Taunt-IO for the taunt aspect? You seem to be simply wanting to slot it for the proc. Even if you had a taunt, your taunt wouldn't override even a scraper Challenge or a stalker's Provocation. It would be in a tier below those three and I think even those two might be able to be overridden by the taunt of damage in some cases. I don't think taunting fits with the Sentinel archetype. I don't think that Sentinels should have the advantage of being able to slot a taunt proc any more than a melee archetype should be able to slot a ranged AoE proc. My two cents on it.

--- rewrite in new post ---

You made your points. I made mine. Thanks for the discussion.

Great. You have proven my point. from WIKI "City of Heroes (CoH) was a massively multiplayer online role-playing game which was developed by Cryptic Studios and published by NCSOFT." City of Heroes IS an MMO. So if you want a superhero game that isn't an MMO, then you should find another game to play. Not sure what that means. It simulates Superheroes fighting crime, hanging out with other superheroes in their bases and in other environments, all kinds of other things, and has a EXTREMELY in depth character customization (Biography area still is too small, but apparently that can't be fixed without linking to external resources). There are additional components, but you do not have to get involved with those if you don't want to. Super heroes do go find contacts, and, in many cases, in comic books they aren't at just one location, they have to go running around and looking for them in order to get information out of them about what is going on in their "CITY". City of Heroes has enhancements, power selection, temp powers, and enhancements instead of armor and weapons. The same gaming principles apply. I think you need to do more research on game theory. And, again, it is obvious that you don't want to play City of Heroes but some other game. I hope that City of Heroes is never changes into what you are looking for. I love City of Heroes and don't want to see it drastically changed at a core level. For your sake, I hope someone else makes a superhero game that fits your standards or that you gather your own development team and design it yourself. The end-game is not the game. It is the part that was added after the game was completed to extend the life of the game for those that don't alt. I believe the more superhero related experience is in the game itself - below level 50.

Yes. Heroes and Villains should be separate. That's one of the core points of ANY superhero genre game. There are Heroes and Villains. We don't need this to be gray morality world. That is not CITY OF HEROES. No. It is easy enough to go to Nul the Gull and change alignment if that is what you want to do. Vigilantes and Rogues can already use teleporters to go to either side. Again. This is CITY OF HEROES and not Gray Morality World. I know some players play it like it is Gray Morality World, but I'm here to play CIty of Heroes where there are heroes and villains ... an those other guys that are in that dystopian utopian thing that was tacked on at the end of the game before the sunset. Uh, yeah. I think that's a standard for all MMO's. I remember when more people thought it was more fun to race between missions and checking out the cool environment during travel. If you don't want to go to contacts, you can run radio or newspaper missions through all your levels. I have the feeling like you don't really want to play an MMO. That's my point of view. You can play how you like, but I'm not for breaking City of Heroes for what other kind of game that you want to be playing because it isn't City of Heroes. Maybe one of the other City of Heroes sites would be better suited for you. They may have done all of these things that you want already. I prefer Homecoming the way that it is. The DEVs here seem to be pretty even-handed and have made great decisions from my point of view. Of course, others are all looking from a different perspective.

Doesn't that help older characters keep their dentures in place?

The OP was complaining about teammates. I was giving suggestions for avoiding bad teammate situations. Like Lu Da says in The Water Margin, "Out of the 36 ways to get out of a bad situation, the best one is to leave" My issue is that I'm leading a taskforce - even a short one like Yin - and some (insert necessary expletives here) level 50 (insert necessary expletives here) decides that they are going to stealth/speed the TF for everyone else and doesn't (insert necessary expletives here) care what the rest of the team thinks or wants. They are the (insert necessary expletives here) and not me for wanting to get xp out of a taskforce when I'm the one that is leading it and did the recruiting. [This also goes for that 50 that doesn't want to recruit for a taskforce, but wants to be the one to lead the team because - to them - they are obviously the most experienced - are the biggest (insert necessary expletives here) - and don't respect that someone else took the time and initiative to recruit the team they are running with.] On the other hand, watching someone Leroy Jenkins over and over again is just (insert necessary expletives here) annoying. Zone into a mission, run into the mob, die, go to the hospital, get back the the mission, run past the team into the next mob (or two) and die, go to the hospital and repeat. When you get into this kind of situation, It is very annoying because this behaviour can obviously endanger the entire team. And yes, I do run into this kind of behavior. Sometimes mix in the team rezzing the character so that they can immediately race into the next mob and die. So yeah, what the other people are doing isn't always about being efficient. Sometimes I just can't tell why they are doing what they are doing because like the example above, it is obvious that the rest of the team isn't falling in battle, why is this other player so obviously oblivious to the rest of the the team? This even goes to entire teams ignoring information that can make the whole team work better and gel as a team. But there is always that old say, "Out of the 36 ways to get out of a bad situation, the best one is to leave" That being said, I really don't think I should be the one that has to leave when I'm the one that recruited the team/taskforce in the first place. I owe it to the players in the team/taskforce that aren't that (insert necessary expletives here) player(s). I only kick people in the very extreme situations. I think I have kicked one. I was on a taskforce. The beginning of a mission they came in and parked and said they had to do something or other. Team finishes the mission and goes to the next mission. Can't start the next mission because that player is still afk in the mission. Took a minute or two to figure out that they were the player that was door sitting on the prior mission. Announced it and gave them 2 minutes to get out of the mission so that we could continue, before booting them. On the other hand, I'll make up an excuse to bail out if I'm not happy with what is going on with a team. I try not to do it on a taskforce (don't think I've done so yet), but I will bail if the situation requires it.