Yomo Kimyata

I will generally tip the bartenders a goodly amount, but whoever is running Pocket D also needs to make sure they are being paid a living wage in salary and benefits.

I have Sprint 3-slotted.

Ten tokens would get 10 characters to 36.

That's hardly a *secret*!

How about: You take the amount of experience that it takes to level from 1-50, call it X. (I realize I can look it up but I just don't care to.). Make tokens that provide X/10 experience to a given character (immune to XP boosters). Grant every *account* 10 of these tokens and make them tradeable on the /AH. Everyone gets one free 1-50 level experience if they choose. If they don't care, let the free market deal with it. Don't allow any other way to achieve these tokens. You can't stop people from making 100 accounts, but I doubt people will game the system that way because, ugh, effort. Or, don't do anything. Status quo is fine.

It seems to me that the purpose of this change is: we have changed the way how damage is applied, more esoteric damage will be more important, let's rebalance by only adding esoteric defense and resistance to legacy sets that were designed with specific esoteric holes in previous times. This is a slipshod process at best, and I hope that you have a lot, LOT more data than I think you have. Good luck.

Totes, but without context, many of us (myself included) make assumptions that may or may not be true, like "OMFG the devs listen to those two whiners and make changes that are worse for everyone else!" And we will never, ever know if it's true or not! (I really hope it isn't!) It's a fine line between telegraphing moves (and therefore people try to game the system) and sharing information. The US Federal Reserve is in a similar predicament (and they TOTALLY listen to whiners!).

But we're going to keep the Secret Cow Level at 15, right?

Part of the issue here is that we haven't (yet) heard what the devs are trying to accomplish. I get that, so I try to back out what I *think* they want from the chain of events and the (so far) three things that have been put on the table. 1. Status quo. Clearly this is not acceptable to those guiding the game. Ok. Let's try to figure out why. 2. Players (specifically lvl 50 players) cannot receive veteran levels and veteran rewards (Emerits) from AE missions. Ok. This specifically works against level 50 players who use the AE specifically to gain vet levels and Emerits. So I assume that the devs want to curb that behavior for various reasons. Personally, I like that, but that is because I am not one of those people, so I recognize my bias. 3. #2 comes off the table for various reasons, and now Emerits can only be used for incarnate awards. Ok. Now I read the focus is not on people farming AE, but on how people spend their Emerits. It's a *much* broader mandate saying: incarnates are incarnates and inf is inf and one shalt not be used for the other. Personally, I dislike this because it affects me personally, although not greatly. I may or may not want to use Emerits for incarnate powers rather than items. What confuses me (and I may be blinded by my bias) is #2 and #3 seem to be targeting two different behaviors, and that 3 is more onerous on a much much larger group of people. Is the point to discourage the farming of Emerits for the purpose of turning them into other currency, or is it to remedy the interaction between incarnate activity and "the economy"? Or something else entirely. I'm looking forward to the Dev Diary when it comes.

I'm guessing it's because you can set up your farming alts, go to sleep, wake up, claim all emerits, delete character, make new character, repeat. It's not that it is the most enjoyable way to obtain goods and inf, but it certainly is the best return for the least amount of active effort. Or at least that is my read on it.

I read on MySpace that only the insta-50s would get access to the last 5 incarnate powers when they raise the cap to 60.

Nothing is "worthless", in my opinion. (unless you are going completely unslotted until you level enough to load up your 50.) But building is one of the mini-games, and there has been enough power creep over the years that it is trivial to come up with these fantastic builds that essentially incorporate 8 characters in one. So you will probably almost always team with someone whose build is numerically superior to yours. And that doesn't matter one bit.

More thoughts: Frozen Armor -- use your standard for defensive toggle. For three slots I'll go with Lotg proc and two lvl 53 cytoskeletons. A cheaper 4-slot idea is Lotg proc and 3 lvl 50 Shield Walls +5. Hoarfrost -- I will generally either 5-slot it with Panacea or 6-slot it with Preventative Med Chilling Embrace -- possible skippable, but focus on end reduction. Slow caps very easily. Wet Ice -- end reduction Glacial Armor -- see Frozen Armor Energy Absorption -- lots of choices here. I get much more value from end mod sets than defense sets. Worth 6 slots imo. Permafrost -- possible skippable, or use as a res damage mule Icicles -- possible skippable Icy Bastion -- good power, slot for recharge. Worth as many slots as you can put in (mostly muling) but my default is probably three Synapse's Shock for recharge and slow resist bonus.

Energy Absorption really does nicely with an Energy Manipulator stun proc in there. No to-hit check, and it effectively neuters all minions (or higher if you have other sources of stun) for 8 seconds.

I have no idea what in the holy hell is up your craw, but the post was not intended in any way to detract from devs. It was to remind everyone that they are (probably) players just like us. If you are one, put on your hat and respond. Otherwise either be inflammatory enough to get this thread locked or just let it die.

Sounds like that was what you wanted/expected to see! Not unexpected given my posting history, true enough.

Well, I have. My intention with this thread, which has apparently gone awry, was rather to remind everyone that the devs have reasons for doing things, and their intention is *probably* *intended* for the greater good. This is a perfect example that on the interwebz people are going to see what they want/expect to see!

@Faultline fair enough. This doesn't seem like a big enough issue to get other teams involved. That said, I also don't think that it's a big enough issue to implement, but then again I don't plan on insta-50 PvPing. It seems like there is a lot more potential for downside than upside, but I haven't been managing a free-to-play game for 2+ years so what do I know!

Or perhaps shards, maybe I'm using the wrong nomenclature. Surely the HC devs can speak with the HC system administratiors?

I don't know yet, and I'm perhaps overly cautious. By making it a specific PvP server with no connections to PvE (maybe make it Brainstorm) there is little chance of a loophole. I guess the flip question is, why *shouldn't* it be a specific PvP server?

I'm all for this, but please be careful to completely separate PVE from PVP. Like completely different servers separate. I, for one, am not willing to give up one iota from my PvE experience to try and encourage a few dozen or hundred people to try PvP, and then find they are using it as a backdoor to affect markets or power levelling. In my life's experience, when there is an exploitative loophole, people will find it and people will use it.

Have you tried using stearic acid as a stiffening agent?

Oh, I know what YOU want. Just peace in the woods with your animals and an occasional wanderer who you can skin and make into a fancy hat.

When we enter transition times, like when a new issue is a-coming, I think it's healthy to ask who or what these mythological "devs" are and what their objectives are. Here's what I assume: - Many/most/all of the devs are current or former players. They are probably going to want to influence the game towards a direction where they continue to enjoy playing the game themselves. With that assumption, I'm frequently going to ask myself who the decision makers are and how do they like to play. - No one is getting paid. The intention is not to encourage pay-per-anything or keep hours/days/years of retention. An additional corollary might be that devs might be inclined to not work dozens of hours a week to change stuff. - *The incentive is to keep (and attract) as many players as possible for the longest period of time. Well, at least, that is what I would do. If you like teaming, why not have as big a pool as possible? My point, if I have one, is to try to understand why changes are made. It's probably because there is an intention behind it. Maybe it's an economic intention; maybe it's a moral one. But unless you, yes you, I see you there, have pissed off one or more devs to get them to make rules against you, maybe we should accept that they are aimed at making this experience a better place for all of us? Crazy thought, right? Happy hunting!

How about making a PvP server that only covers those zones? Link the /AH to the main one. or, make character creation so easy that your character is deleted after every session. I doubt I will pvp significantly again, but I’d rather do it at 25 than double secret extra power 50.