ZacKing

This is what I usually do. Side note - I really miss being able to convert EMP merits to Reward Merits. That was a dumb change IMO. But whatever, it is what it is now.

Gentle Reminder - please don't turn this into another farming is PURE EVIL! vs farming is fun debate.

Right. And he and others like him won anyway.

Well no, you're the one arguing that this happens in theatre all the time and that "Shakespeare nerds are ahead of the curve". You're also criticizing others for asking the same question - what's the rationale for it? That's literally what you said lol. Yes, they are in fact rules. Please educate yourself. From the linked article - See, here's where you're wrong and really very ignorant. You're stupidly lumping anyone who questions casting choices and how a message is being delivered into the "deplorables" or white evangelical conservative pile. That speaks volumes to your ignorance and intolerance. For your information, I don't listen to the Daily Wire or any of that other crap. You're way, way off base there. I could also take a page out of Brie Larson's book and say the same thing right back at you. You don't like that the Disney princesses were all white? Ok, well there's other options out there for you now. They weren't made for you. Go watch something else. Of FFS are you honestly going to say that movies that are financial successes aren't considered to be of good enough quality that people went to see them and spent money on them? Like I said before, I didn't like Titanic at all. I think it's a stupid movie. That's not changing it's financial success at all. Of course I think filet mignon from a 5 star Michelin restaurant is a better quality meal than a Big Mac from McDonalds. That doesn't change the fact that McDonalds is financially successful. Opinions are great, but they're subjective. Numbers are facts. What you're trying to do is suggest people are saying that filet mignon is bad and a Big Mac is superior because McDonalds sells more. That's not at all true and not what anyone is saying at all. You're just arguing to argue at this point.

See, now I know you're disingenuous and being contrarian just to argue. On one hand, you're saying you don't care because it's done in theatre all the time, while at the same time trying to say it "depends on the context". Which is it? You either care or you don't. What context are you going by? Pure talent and charisma? Ok, then let's put Leonardo DiCaprio as T'Challa in Black Panther III. Let's replace Simu Liu with Christian Bale in the next Shang Chi. They're both very talented and more than qualified, so putting them into those roles should be fine according to you. How about casting Denzel Washington as Amon Goth in a remake of Schindler's List? Or Margot Robbie as Cellie Harris-Johnson in The Color Purple? Unless you don't think they're talented enough to pull off the roles? That recasting happens in theatre all the time, so you shouldn't care. That's exactly correct AND he did it without any "inclusivity requirements" or other such rules. That's a testament to his talent, and for you to be suggesting he and others only win these awards because of their skin color and "inclusivity requirements" is quite frankly disgusting. We all get it just fine. You've given plenty of examples based on opinion. You can't provide any measure that's based on facts. See, you still don't get it. If the hotdogs there are selling more than the steak, then that means a lot of people like them enough to spend money for that meal, which means that hotdog meal is a success by the objective measure of money made. Here again, you're analogy doesn't work. You're attempting to say that McDonald's isn't a success because there are five star Michelin restaurants out there. That's not even a remotely close comparison and I think you know that, but you're just desperate to try and prove that your opinions are facts. They aren't. And guess what? Both McDonalds AND the five star Michelin restaurant can be successful.

^Exactly.

You're using subjective opinions for excuses which is ok, but it's not a real measure of success or failure. Box office receipts and profits are the objective measure because numbers don't lie. Films that rake in big profits are successful which means most paying customers found them to be well written and well produced. That's a fact, whether you personally liked the movie or not. I didn't like "Titanic", but it raked in billions, so it's a success whether I think it was a good movie or not.

This is really, really ignorant. Maybe I'm wrong, but I get the impression reading your post here that anyone who disagrees with you is somehow a far right evangelical radical. That's just not true. It seems to me you haven't done any research on your own and looked into why people rail against "the message". First, it's not "the message", it's how it's being conveyed. A message of tolerance and acceptance of everyone regardless of race or gender or orientation is a good thing and a wonderful message to have. @Ghost is exactly right though, it's the preachy way it's being conveyed, along with studios and actors using it as an excuse for poor ticket sales on bad films. For example, did you see "Bros"? If not, then according to the actor, you're a homophobe. Did you go and see "The Woman King"? If not, then according to the studio and actors, you're a racist misogynist. How should people react when they're being accused of being something they aren't like that? Maybe they just don't like romantic comedies or pseudo-historical period dramas. The Hobbit films raked in billions. What's your point? And Peter Jackson didn't want to do another trilogy. The studio basically forced him into it. Ezra Miller is an awful actor. He's a huge part of the problem as he's not leading man material and can't carry a film on his own, which is why Keaton was brought back to try and salvage the movie with the nostalgia factor. He's totally miscast as The Flash and a solo movie for him never should have been greenlit in my opinion. Well sure, there's idiots everywhere but they're easily identified and just as easily ignored. Being foreign made has nothing to do with it. It was a successful movie made on a budget that's a fraction of what Hollywood spends on movies of that type. Yes, it speaks exactly to the point I was making about budgets. This is just flat out wrong. Movie studios are businesses who don't have limitless funds. They're in the business of making as much money as they can for their shareholders.

I don't agree with this at all and if you'd listen to what those "pissy YouTube critics" are saying, they're right on the money. What they're saying is it's the studios hiring shit writers who don't know how to write or don't respect or understand the source material. It's the studios spending literal shit tons of money on and way over relying on visual effects and spectacle of big action set pieces to compensate for a crap story. It's the studios hiring and way overpaying untalented "actors" who can't act and aren't capable of leading a film (see Ezra Miller and "The Flash"). The whole pushing of the "message" is a crutch for the studios to complain that audiences are xenophobes or homophobes or racists or misogynists or whatever other isms there are when people don't pay to go see their shit movies that wind up flopping at the box office and losing millions. As an example, take Godzilla: Minus One. It's budget was around 10 to 15 mil and brought in 10 times that in worldwide box office. Were that made in Hollywood instead, it would have easily topped 150 or 200 million budget, if not more. The Marvels had a near 300 million dollar budget. That's around the same budget for all 3 LoTR movies combined and the LoTR trilogy raked in billions. Why? Because it's a well crafted story with interesting characters. Where did that money go on the Marvels? Spending all that didn't make the story any better or the film more successful. It stunk and the studio knew it was going to stink from the get go, but they're more about pushing out quantity over quality to have content for their failing streaming services to try and compete with Netflix. Write a good movie with well thought out characters and well crafted story arc and people will go see it.

This series made Iron Fist look good and that's saying something.

This will probably be the only good Marvel movie to make any money in the next 10 to 15 years, if the MCU even lasts that long.

Nope. I'm out.

It basically means pushing of a social justice agenda. Sad thing is, there's no need for it in my opinion and it seems like it's being used as an excuse for why modern movies suck and blaming the audience for not going to see it. If studios hired talented writers who know how to craft good stories with fleshed out, well written characters, people will go to see it. Doesn't matter what race or gender the characters are. I'm not sure how or when it happened that somehow people think there were never strong female characters in TV and films. I love kick ass characters like Wonder Woman, Sarah Connor, Ellen Ripley, Samantha Carter, Teyla Emmagen, Storm, Jean Grey etc etc.

If you are hero side, go to the Supergroup Registrar in City Hall in Atlas Park. Click on the NPC and create your supergroup. If you are villain side, you need to visit the registrar in the Arachnos building in Port Oakes to register your villain group. Once you've done that, head to any base portal and click on it to enter your base. Once inside, I highly recommend watching the excellent series of base building videos Dacy put together to guide you through the base editor on how to build things. Those videos are a truly superb way to learn the ropes. Good luck and enjoy building!

I have LOOKED at your new listing document, thanks. I keep my own list of bases that I like and/or frequent and will update it as needed. As I said, I'm not the target audience for this so best of luck with it. I'm sure there are players who will get some use out of it.

Sadly no, you can't resize or change the scale of objects. Just move them around.

The shadow clones can be quite a challenge on Posi. I always try to keep lots of summonable pets like Amy or P2W pets to help. They can make a big difference.

Can't wait for the inevitable of NCSoft charging big big bucks for the license fee. 😁

Ok so if I'm understanding this right, the HC team doesn't have any control over what is or isn't on the Wiki, but why can't people from HC contribute to the Wiki? That way information can be kept up to date and sorted/organized how you all would like. If it's "official info", just set permissions on the page(s) so that only someone from the HC team can edit or approve edits. That way, people aren't deleting info. As far as the Wiki not being searchable, not sure that makes sense since Wikis have search functionality already built in. Anyway, just wanted to ask since this new list separate from the existing Wiki seems redundant to me. I guess I'm not the target audience for it though, so good luck with it.

Question about the base listing... is another one really needed? We already have extensive lists of bases with passcodes on the Wiki. Torchbearer Bases Excelsior Bases Everlasting Bases Indomitable Bases Reunion Bases Each of the server subforums has a link to those Wiki pages too. Wouldn't it be easier to just link to these and/or sticky the threads in the server subforums?

No one has suggested this wasn't HC policy, nor do I see anyone suggesting that HC was abandoning it? No idea where you're getting any of that from other than to try and deflect from you having you being incorrect about some stuff. It's not really an irrelevant comparison. It didn't produce much on live and I would bet inf it's not really going to produce much of a result here. Sure, number wise it's going to free up more names here since people can create more characters on HC than they could on live. That's great, assuming that the names getting freed up aren't just gibberish to begin with. It's also completely meaningless to anyone hoping a name is in that list, but isn't.

You're still not getting it and it certainly isn't my math that's off. If there's a list of 1,000,000 names on the inactive list, what are the odds the name you're after is even in there to begin with and that it would get freed up so you get that name? And get it before someone else does? Certainly not "1 in 3".... Sorry but no, the name release thing was from the live days and run on the live servers, so it isn't some new bit of code the HC folk wrote entirely on their own. There have been Dev posts discussing the naming issue before. If you've never seen them, then I suggest you do your research so you can speak intelligently about the subject. In previous threads on the topic, there was a discussion around why there had to be the need to log into every character to keep the name active instead of basing it on account activity and not character activity. That way, the devs would know if an account was active and the player could contact the name owner to negotiate releasing it. The devs explained how the account database is different/separate from the character database and it wouldn't be possible to base it off of account activity as the code stands now. To be fair, I'm not sure I'm summarizing it exactly, but I believe that's the gist of it. In similar threads the devs explained that changing the code to make names a combo of account and character name (character@account) like Cryptic had in their second gen engine would be a huge project. Not impossible, but big enough that it was easier for them to re-use the old name release code from live. The technical reasons have been discussed here before by the devs.

This isn't true either. The whole "name release" routine was created back when the game was live. As I remember it, and I could be wrong, it was run once and didn't provide anywhere near the intended result. If my memory is correct here, this was being enabled here because there were a few people complaining on the HC Discord about names being already taken. So yeah, there were and still are people arguing for this for selfish reasons.

If I may, I fully support you all in any back end code improvements you make that would improve overall performance and fix long-standing issues with the game engine. To be honest, I'd happily give up new costume pieces and missions and power sets while these more important tasks get done for the overall, long term health and growth of the game. As always, thank you all for your efforts here.

Hey, I can't help it if you didn't read the posts before jumping on your high horse to try and white knight.... again.