ImpousVileTerror

5 - Heroes of Redside, Villains of Blueside This is an idea which I really like. It's also an idea which I know a non-zero number of people vehemently oppose. Complaints range from the standard "it'll break the game," to the "narratively there's no justification," to the "but it'll make PvP happen." The game might be pretty fragile, with little changes completely shattering seemingly unrelated components that are "miles away" from the affected code, but as someone who was part of City of Villains Beta . . . I know that it's already possible. The potential exists within the game code already for this to be added (or, more accurately: Polished and reactivated). It's not an insignificant amount of work by any stretch of the imagination; no mere toggle flip . . . but it IS possible. And even if the code which existed during the City of Villains Beta is not stable enough to use, we DO have Rogues and Vigilantes; the proof is in the pudding right there. Even if we have to create a NEW Hero Alignment and a NEW Villain Alignment, with their own unique rules for cross-alignment Zoning, it -is- doable. The most significant challenge after the coding itself is that each zone would need to be changed to accommodate an opposing alignment Hospital, like the ones in Pocket D or PvP zones. These would also need to be protected from opposing alignment interference (both player and NPC). That's a daunting prospect, if only for the potential grief it could cause new players . . . but "bounce back" teleport areas exist, so these barriers don't necessarily need to be one-hit-"arrest" Drones. Alternatively, the "invading" player would get bounced back to some other zone's Hospital on their native side. Narratively there is a TONNE of justification! The Mayhem missions. The Rogues Gallery and NPC Hero factions. The Longbow and Arachnos bases in enemy territory. Not to mention that there are Heroes who have lived their whole lives in the Etoiles (Sea Witch, Scrapyard, Iron Widow), and . . . well, throw a Rock, and you'll hit any number of Villains in Paragon City. Now . . . yes, there is a -little- problem in terms of "shouldn't all Heroes and Villains be instantly hostile to one another under these conditions?" Yeah, ok, there's a bit of a narrative disjoint there. But diplomatic immunity is a thing. It might take a little mental gymnastics to get there, but I think we can come up with firmer justifications. PvP is not necessary. The alignment code is a lot more robust than some people seem to think it is. Again, not an insignificant amount of work to implement, but the code would even potentially allow for players to choose whether or not to flag themselves for PvP as part of their alignment. "Conditional" is the current behaviour when a Rogue or Vigilante attempts to join a team containing a Hero or Villain respectively. "Neutral" would function like the Warburg PvP, where members of a given alignment can attack one another OR join up in to a team, at their discretion. The next significant hurdle, though, is adjusting all of the Contacts. Most of the Redside Contacts are already flagged specifically for Villains, as I recall, but Blueside? Some of them are a little . . . confused. Turning a Rogue away for not being a hero at times, but then allowing a Rogue to complete what is clearly a heroic story arc just because it wasn't explicitly flagged as "Hero" in the code. THIS would be yet another can of worms' worth of work. Additional Contacts would also need to be added, lest the Heroes of the Rogue Isles and the Villains of Paragon City just end up being a bunch of Street-Sweeping tourists. Ultimately, though, this would also give a wonderful opportunity for Vigilantes to get the much unrepresented "cleaning up the City of Villains" gameplay they were promised when the middling alignments were first introduced. This also wouldn't necessarily "solve" the problem with people feeling the Isles are too dreary, but might at least motivate those players to play alignments or in zones they wouldn't normally consider. At the very least, investigating this for the Hazard Zones . . . there's potential there. Boomtown seems the most accessible.

4 - Villain Motivation and Agency (or "The Lackey Problem") Yeah . . . this beast. As mentioned, I tried to get a community project rolling to address this. While it definitely garnered attention and interest, it has had little in the way of progress for a while now. I will definitely be focusing attention on it again once I get my plate cleared, though. It's something that has been on my radar ever since being invited to City of Villains' First Wave Beta. And really, it's not uniquely a problem for Redside; there are Blueside, Neutral, and Yellowside Missions which are also guilty of stealing the player's agency to determine their characters' motivations, feelings, and behaviour. It's just that when it comes to villainy, the old "Heroes React, Villains ACT" mantra that was being repeated since CoV's alpha development cycle (probably sooner, even) . . . well! It's true in theory, but in practice the existing writing falls far short of delivering in that department. The most common "argument" against correcting this is the "but it's an MMO, you can't fix it." I don't mean to get toxic in saying this, but I honestly feel sorry for people who see things that way. It strikes me as such a dearth of creative problem solving . . . I feel awful for saying this. English isn't necessarily the best language, but it DOES offer us some wonderful tools in terms of writing through different personages. Much of the most problematic writing in this game is either from a First-Person or Second-Person perspective. The best way to address villain motivation is to get in there and rewrite everything to Third-Person. Don't: "This uptight shrink has analyzed you for a series on notable villains in the Protector. She says your violent tendencies stem from an unhappy childhood and feelings of inadequacy, and that you suffer from extreme intimacy issues. Words do not describe the rage welling inside you." Do: "Doctor Vanover is a popular newspaper psychotherapist who writes for the Rogue Isle Protector. She has published her analyses on the psyches of a number of notable villains, $MISSION_LEADER included. Vanover makes sweeping generalizations about violent tendencies stemming from an unhappy childhood and feelings of inadequacy, followed up by claims of extreme intimacy issues. She's likely angered many villains with publicized claims like these, which makes her a valuable target for kidnapping." As much as the rewritten version of this is "scrubbed" of the original flavour, and as much as the original flavour was "fun," this rewrite places all the power to define the player-character squarely in the hands of their player. It also doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility of the original motivation either. The player can still say, to themself or to their teammates, "words do not describe the rage welling up inside of me!" It is the player's choice now, as it always should have been. This isn't impossible. This isn't even difficult. It's not some imaginary ideal which can't be obtained. But it would be a truly massive undertaking. We're talking about doing editorial work on pretty much the entirety of the game's writing. A task where whoever works on this project would need to retain the original intent of the material, and keep as much impact as possible. Hence my attempt to encourage it as a community project. Distributed work is productive work, assuming it has strong direction. And the more we do this work, the better we can become at refining it. Obviously, not everyone will be a fan of this kind of change. There are clearly players here who are expecting and enjoy an experience where they trust the author to know the player-character better than the player does. I think that kind of writing is perfectly fine and dandy . . . for games like Uncharted, or The Last of Us, or even Mass Effect. But City of Heroes, and ESPECIALLY City of Villains? No thank you. I will not speak for everyone, but I -AM- certain that I am not alone in wanting agency over my own characters. I have done a LOT of research on this particular issue and the impact it has on other players' enjoyment. A lot. Of course . . . A complete rewrite of the game's narrative content is NOT the only way to start addressing this issue. Or at least, it's not the easiest way. While some people were apparently up in arms about it, the premise behind https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/19486-more-info-when-looking-at-contacts/ is solid. If we were to apply that treatment to Redside content, we could forewarn players about what motivations the content is written to express. I think that would be a huge improvement, giving players the authority to say "okay, hold on. This arc says 'Villain wants money?' Yeah, not my villain. Pass." But then naturally, we would then have to provide more content to compensate for the loss of potential paths that player will now choose to take. But the prospect of new content is generally received more favourably than the suggestion of changing existing content, even if the change is relatively superficial. Someone **!!!** approached me recently with a lovely idea, which I -really- hope they'll post soon. But, to wet some appetites, the concept is pretty simple: A new villain chooses a Motivational Contact at character creation. Much like the Epic Archetype Contacts combined with the Yellowside "Path" Contacts, this Contact would be persistent throughout the entire villain character's career from level 1 to level 50. Every 5 Levels they would give the player a story arc which is specifically catered to the Motivation the player chose at the start. Beyond that, I have lots of ideas of how I'd implement this idea, but it's someone else's baby. I am going to give them a chance to post their take on it before I twist the idea in to my own thing. **!!!** They just posted it! https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/19762-new-redside-content-ambitions/

3 - New Content (Zones / Enemies / Missions): Yes, please. But, really, that's true for every aspect of the game, no? Generally the people decrying the prospect of "MORE" are arguing against overwhelming a limited volunteer staff with too much work, and (to the best of my reading, anyway) not arguing against content for content's sake alone. What we've seen from the Base Builder, however, is that there are incredibly talented players with exquisite skill and impeccable visual design knowledge. Giving these players access to devkit tools to build actual Zones, frankly, should be a priority. Naturally level design with an understanding of gameplay function and resource management isn't the same thing as making a gorgeous base, but they're learnable skills. At worst, we have the creatives make the zones as part of a first-pass, and then have the level designers refine, optimize, and populate the zones. Teamwork solves many problems, especially with solid direction guiding such teams. I really believe this is one of the most feasible methods to Redside vitalization, and it also applies for the entire game at large. The prospect of New Enemies is, much like the zone work, something that is obtainable as far as I can see. And, like the zones, we have many players who are chomping at the bit to share their creations. Naturally, new 3D asset resources are not a simple matter, so such enemies would likely need to recycle existing assets. As we've seen with Icon/Paragon Chat under -n conditions, there are undeniably talented creatives who can make absolutely stunning creations with what is already available, but locked away. Of course, new content of this kind requires a great deal of testing, so there's some overhead there. Mathematical analyse would need to take place, balancing cycles, et cetera, et cetara. All worthwhile, of course. And this is the sort of thing which also seemed to offer a bigger draw back on Legacy for Beta Testing. Again, doable, but with barriers to overcome in terms of opening up and delegating work from a managerial position. New Missions . . . this is where I'm probably an odd voice of dissent. I'm not in the "open the floodgates" camp on this one, but also firmly against that damnable "Sturgeon's revelation" bullshit. When it comes to this, more than anything other form of new content, I firmly believe THIS is the one which -needs- teams to create. @holymittens did a stellar job of the new Rogue and Vigilante arcs, though . . . how much of that was holymittens being given free reign, and how much of it was a collective effort? In either case, I think it was great stuff, and I'm sad to see that more of it hasn't come up in the past few Pages of updates. But, yeah. Writing teams. Editors. Directors. Community engagement during the creative process. No, I'm not saying "make story creation a democratic process." I'm saying "take care to examine this particular creative process from significant, diverse points of view." Story content by its nature occupies this position of fundamental importance. Aside from gameplay mechanics, it is "THE Content" for games in general. And in a game like City of Heroes / City of Villains . . . well . . . more of this subject later, when we get to the part about Villain Motivation below. (Section 4) In all three cases, of course, there's another element to examine before committing: Computational resources. Not the developmental resources. With outsourcing and directed teamwork, I think that's frankly a solved problem just waiting on approval. No . . . I mean . . . how much raw data are we adding to the PIGGs? How much server load? What effects would these have on both server performance and individual player performance? Who's going to refactor and optimize all of this? I mean, we already know that Kallisti Wharf, Night Ward, and First Ward are absolute NIGHTMARES for lower end rigs. How much worse would it get if we just "add more?" And, of course, the "can't share I26 code for risk of lawsuit" spectre looms over us. OuroDev is a good stepping stone over that, though. But also seems the Homecoming Team are avoiding expressly instructing members of the community to focus attention in particular areas. Whether that's due to the Team not wanting to stifle creativity, or a matter of being fearful that it would be tantamount to endorsing activities which might carry a punitive legal ramification . . . well, I hope we can get some real clarity on all of these subjects at some point, with as little mincing of words as possible.

2 - Aesthetic Changes: On an entirely personal and greedy standpoint: Please, don't "spruce up" the Isles. The current aesthetic is personally one of the biggest draws. The Villain zones are TEEMING with life and characterization. If something -optional- could be done in that department, sure, okay. But Redside is beautiful just the way it is. However . . . the complaint does come up often enough, so it definitely merits attention. The draw of certain aesthetics is a deeply personal and subjective thing, but perhaps we can attempt to explore some sample mock-ups of the Isles with some different palette options, luminousity, and contrast settings. Post those images up and see which ones obtain traction under certain criteria, such as: - Meets the narrative resonance of the Etoile Isles as "The City of Villains." - Inspires player interest. - Allows for players' continued, long-term viewing of the material. Naturally, still image mock-ups won't give the full picture (excuse the pun) of what the Isles would "feel like" to explore and interact with within the three-dimensional space, but it would be a good step toward some market research. The feasibility on this, of course, is pretty iffy. Doing a graphical asset overhaul of an entire portion of the game is NOT a small undertaking. So, unless the market research shows overwhelming support of the changes, it's really not something obtainable (to the best of my knowledge . . . still wish I could see what we're really working with in terms of developmental experience, skill, time, and resource allocation).

1 - Introduction: This is one which is probably in my Top 5 Most Passionate Subjects, and something which I've done a lot of reflection on, a lot of asking around on, and a lot of analyse of. So . . . be prepared for a MONSTER of a post. It's also one where we've collectively brought up the subject many times. https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/18738-sciroccos-patron-arc-encapsulates-everything-i-dont-like-about-redside-writing/?tab=comments#comment-208906 So often, in fact, that I already had a small compilation of threads on the subject from a previous post! Once I get some other activities/events under control, I'm going to focus my attention on the community project linked to above. I've also been in touch with another player **!!!** who has been working on compiling their plans for a motivation-based villain gameplay system. I like what ideas they were springing off of me, and I hope they finalize the first draft soon. They plan to post it in the Suggestions Board once it's ready, although it seems a lot of other people have suggested pretty similar ideas in this very thread. And as one final note; I come from a very roleplay-focused perspective. I like game mechanics to serve the game lore, but I also acknowledge the need for shorthand abstraction in the name of enjoyment. I would suspect that an exact simulation would not be as appealing as the game we have now. **!!!** They just posted it! https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/19762-new-redside-content-ambitions/

Ok . . . SO! I've been writing this post since Sunday, but the topic is one which I am so passionate about, I just kept revising and double-checking stuff, and revising and- . . . et cetera. Meanwhile, the whole thread continued on without me, and some fantastic posts were made! Excellent points have been raised, great ideas have been shared, and wonderful perspectives have been exquisitely expressed. At this time, I think I'll just look like a bit of a complete fool to post all of this without giving this little bit of context first (not that I'm _not_ a complete fool, mind you). After all, a lot of what I try to say here is stuff which other posters have already said, give or take. Therefore, the following is what I had intended to post, just in case anyone cares for yet another perspective on the topic. The following post was pretty big. To help you navigate it, I've broken it up in to various parts. This should also help other members of the community who choose to apply Reputation to the parts they agree or disagree with as they see fit, rather than lumping it all together as a single prospect. I have created a Table of Contents to help with navigation. To utilize the Table of Contents if the hyperlinks fail, use your browser's Find/Search function (typically Ctrl+F) and type in the numeral and title for the respective section as it appears below. ------- 1 - Introduction 2 - Aesthetic Changes 3 - New Content (Zones / Enemies / Missions) 4 - Villain Motivation and Agency 5 - Heroes of Redside, Villains of Blueside 6 - Arachnos 7 - "There Are Plenty of Islands in the Isles" 8 - The Level 8 Strike Force 9 - Zone Events 10 - Rewards 11 - Archetypes and Null 12 - Socialization 13 - Final Thoughts -------

But a peanut is not a nut. . . . also: "meeßagew" wut?!

I'm afraid I've got my own craziness to attend to. . . . I'm not sure if I should say it now, or wait until I've got the first 80-or-so of them done . . . Suffice it to say, it involved extensive research from sources such as the New York City census. In any event; I wish you much luck and enjoyment!

Alternatively, Dismiss your Henchpets before travelling.

Ok, so, a full team of 8, let's see . . . Each player being responsible for roughly 264 characters, with someone picking up the slack and grabbing the loose extra. OR Each player doing 24 characters, with someone only needing to do 23 instead.

Having to give away Statesmans? Yeah. That scans.

No, @Hunttar, I'm pretty sure Levelling Pacts broke the game in a more -literal- way. I heard people complaining in the first couple of days of Homecoming's launch that Pacts completely prevented Experience gain, even after the Pact was split.

You're coming up to the One Year Anniversary of this thread. Does anyone have anything special planned?

They're more similar than you may think!

Australia in general is the exception to prove the rule.

No deal, Bopper! But I can schedule in some "massage" sessions . . . Tangentially, what would you say is your favourite internal organ?

I think one of the actual Kings of Math might take . . . "concern" at that. @Bopperprobably has the strongest claim to that crown right now. They're so math'y that they didn't realize that most people didn't know what the significance of a sigma sign was in an equation. (Also, "king" is not the appropriate royal title for me regardless.) I'll gladly take "Monarch of Tentacles," as my royal title though.

221 Stalker Combos, or 17 Stalkers minimum to get one with each Power Set. 144 Controller Combos, or 16 Controllers minimum. 247 Scrapper Combos, or 19 minimum. 169 Blaster Combos, or 13 minimum. 88 Dominator Combos, or 11 minimum. 286 Brute Combos, or 22 minimum. 264 Tanker Combos, or 22 minimum. 156 Sentinel Combos, or 13 minimum. 208 Corruptor Combos, or 16 minimum. 112 Mastermind Combos, or 16 minimum. 208 Defender Combos, or 16 minimum. 3 Widow Builds. 3 Soldier Builds. 2 Peacebringer. 2 Warshade. Grand totals of: 2113 unique combinations or 191 with minimal Set repetition for each Archetype. or 88 if we treat Sets as "the same thing" between different Archetypes. (Note: This was slapped together without proofreading or error correction. Numbers may have been calculated incorrectly.)

Biology's fine, it's -law- that's fucked.

Suggestions and feedback related to the website and forums should probably be posted in: https://forums.homecomingservers.com/forum/63-website-suggestions-feedback/ Also, according to a brief reply I received from @Jimmy on this matter: "It's just a brief test, assuming there's no issues we'll be opening it up to everyone soon!"

That would be a handy feature! Along with character alignment.

That's some really stellar work! Thank you for sharing, and kudos to your spouse for her fantastic work! Soooooooo . . . would she be willing to take base commissions with in-game rewards as trade?

You'll probably have to. Honestly, given how many more Melee Sets there are than other Types of Sets, and how many Archetypes have the same Melee and Survival Sets, you may even need to pre-math this out to find an optimal balance. Or . . . just wing it. OR OR! Roll Randomly! https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/19294-a-random-idea/?tab=comments#comment-215437

I'd recommend a staggered approach. Rather than doing all Blasters, do a Blaster, then a Scrapper, then a Defender, then a Tanker, then a Controller, et cetera. Once you've done one of each Archetype, cycle back and start back at Blaster.

You can always post a "spoiler" here, which people have to click on to reveal. Best of both worlds!