Forager

That's right! You did respond to that thread! Great job. But I wonder... if you don't think the criticism applies to your post, why you would defend your post against it. You're allowed to do this, of course. Hey man... have fun.

Don't forget that Kallisti Wharf was unpopulated for 5 years...

Lol wut? Ok, man. Have fun.

If you go look at the (Future) Echo Founders Falls thread you can see them at work. It's a great example. The responses in that thread are so mind numbing and pedantic... it seems almost malicious, like they do this for sport. I really can't tell if these people are genuinely that obtuse or they're pretending to be... and I'm not even sure which is worse. The poster even couched their example with the fact that the assets already exist in game, but the Idea Police still found a way...

The irony was not lost on me. But if it's going to be tragic... at least it's poetic. I knew that there would be people who experienced difficulty with what I said. I've used the internet before. I did NOT expect the consistency, numbers and intensity, though. There was a guy in the thread earlier who said that the many outweigh the few when it comes to perception... and he meant it unironically. Like that was the defense of his point. More people said it. His group was bigger. Again, I'm not new to the internet... but I do get surprised every once in awhile. I knew the plot was gone when the fact that I reply meant that I'm wrong lol. Think about how chilling an insinuation that is.

That's right! Echo zones are old versions of zones. OP is proposing an echo zone that's not an old version of a zone. It would be a... new? Alternate? Different! It would be a different version of a zone.

A bit of a non sequitur there... but answering in good faith: I'm participating in the conversation because I started it and I want to.

I asked the guy... then I... what? And even if I was "still trying" whatever that means... so? You actually outlined reasons to try... you said I think it's stupid, you said the dev avoided answering, and you said I know that a dev's stated stance will affect discourse... yeah... what? Lol. Yeah. You've got it. I think people should quit using that argument. I think if a dev said people should stop using that argument, that some of them would stop. Right. You got it. Right on. Nailed it. That's my position. And to try and avoid going around again, YOU CAN STILL BE ALLOWED TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT IF YOU DESIRE. I fully support your free speech and right to make... any... kind of argument.

I accepted it. I accepted it over and over. I never didn't accept it. You are allowed to do it. You've always been allowed. You'll always be allowed. Nobody ever thought you weren't allowed. Nobody thinks you shouldn't be allowed. Everybody agrees you're allowed to do it. I've maintained this. I've repeated it. This reply might even seem familiar. And yet... the argument persists... it's practically supernatural at this point. I'm very surprised that people would still type something like that and hit send. You're allowed. You're allowed times a million. I just think it's stupid.

A summary thus far. I said something was dumb and counterproductive. Everyone argued that they were allowed to do it... over and over... with nobody. A dev said they were allowed to do it. People celebrated. You really can move the goalposts if you have enough help.

Well thats obviously not true lol.

Lol... what do y'all think happened? He said you were free to discuss it. You were always free to discuss it. You will always be free to discuss it. Point #1 was that it is stupid. That point still stands tall. I don't think anyone ever even addressed it. You all just argued with the censorship ghost. Y'all gonna latch onto that first sentence like the second one isn't there lol.

The most control you have is picking front, middle or back as spawn points. Some maps have a lot of possibilities for those, some maps have less, some maps have one or even none. Outdoor maps you have no control over. I actually have the most luck walking around in test mode and looking at the spawn points on the mini map to help me figure out where to put them. Green is front, white is middle, red is back (blue in the editor). If you really want things to happen in a certain order AND be placed predictably or easy to find, you have to select the map to match your mechanics, or match your mechanics to the map. For instance, some places have multiple spawn points marked as "back" in one room, close together. This would let you have things happen back there in a certain order without making the player search by marking them all to spawn in "back." Otherwise, the typical solution would be to put your ally in the front, the boss in the back and hope the player finds the ally. Some places have only one spawn point marked "front" for an ally, so finding him is easy and straightforward. Some have a bunch and they're easier to pass. P.S. And yeah some of the maps in the editor do show the floors out of order.

Alphabetic always seemed weird to me. I group city and hazard together. 1. The cab is Low level blue + Pocket D 2. The hot rod is High level blue 3. The 4x4 is Red zones 4. Praetoria is of course the coolest looking, least practical teleporter and I never use it. 5. Shadow Shard is at the complete other end of the room. 6. The flyer is Terra Volta, Kallisti Wharf and RWZ because those 3 just seem weird to me and are separate. I have another one elsewhere in the base with Atlas Park, Talos Island, Peregrine Island, Grandville, Pocket D and RWZ as a little fast travel station. I end up using that one a lot if I'm over there and see something on LFG.

What? You don't like your huge model, war-god themed characters with wings breakdancing?

What do you think?

Yeah... that. That's who I'm talking about. Did all these folks just assume I meant them?

What do you think about posters arguing that an idea would be too difficult to implement? How valuable is that sort of discussion to you?

Because OP suggested it and it sounded fun and cool? That also sounds fun and cool.

^ That's pretty fair. About point 1, I think my original explanation is fine as it stands. I think it's a full stop, irrelevant topic that is at best nothing and most likely counterproductive. I think the problem with 2 might be terminology based. When I say people are "voting" I meant that's their mindset. Basically they might not think they're voting, but they're thinking like their voting. It's a pretty abstract and subjective idea. I get why it doesn't resonate. The problem with 3... that's just like... my opinion man. I think if you're not part of the solution, you're not part of the conversation. People can disagree with that just like they can disagree with other suggestions. People can post "I don't like it!" and give no reason. They can be ignored. They're not part of the conversation to me. I have no quarrel with posts that just say "I don't like it." I don't consider them at all. They're nothing. I think people confused me personally thinking something is pointless with "it shouldn't be allowed." I'm not a mod. You're allowed to do things that I don't like. I'm allowed to dislike them. You're even allowed to dislike me disliking them. Theres a chance that things that are allowed are not good.

Umm... lol. I'll indulge this. Quote me on that.

I have never used Black Hole... so forgive my ignorance... But shouldn't it ideally just be a trawl that lasts for a few seconds with a large area of effect? And if it doesn't work on a target, it just doesn't work on a target? Am I missing something? It seems obvious that's what the power should be. Is that the consensus?

That's not what OP is suggesting. They are suggesting an echo version. They are not suggesting anything be changed about Founders Falls. They are suggesting a new, separate zone. It wouldn't block anything.

This thread has been so bizarre. I said that there are bad actors spoiling the discussions here. I said there were a few pieces of guidance that would improve the discussions. The replies have amounted to "You're trying to censor us!" "If you don't like it, too bad!" and "How about a place with NO discussion?" And then there's been a pile ironic posters defending the right to criticize things they don't like... while criticizing me personally... for criticizing something that I don't like. It's been a fun time.

That's one possibility. Some people got it, though, so it's hard to be sure.