battlewraith

This is a rhetorical device that people keep doing. I made a proposal. I've either elaborated on the idea or explained why I disagree with the feedback. I don't find "the host of reasons" compelling. The issues about coding or development time, which I feel are just generic assumptions to be made about any suggestion, I've acknowledged. I think I've demonstrated repeatedly that some of the people objecting to the idea are making certain unfounded and subjective assumptions about what the player base is like and what it wants. But then someone will pop in and post some summation along the lines of "all these people have made these good arguments and you haven't addressed anything. Which is really weird, when I pop in and see all the notifications of you going down the line and downvoting my posts, then complaining that I'm not addressing anything lol. You mentioned the WST idea that you like. Instead of posting here again to complain to me, why don't you make a new thread about that idea and boost it? That would be something constructive. The fact that it's not happening, suggests that people don't actually care about this either way they just want an argument. I don't think you're here to help. Especially when the comments are so repetitive.

The proposal requires at least a lvl 50 to unlock. If that's done in good faith, then this educational tool has been applied. If not, whatevs.

Wow. I find this to be a very patronizing way to regard other players, especially when this is a somewhat obscure game and if you end up here it's probably because you know someone or have played similar games. If people want to hop in and jump right to the endgame content, they can do that right now. They have been able to do that for a long time. And the challenge of slotting enhancements revolves around SOs, or lower. Nothing on a par with IO sets, using procs, etc. It's really not rocket science. The kind of person you're worried about is not going to stay anyways. Or they will and it won't be an issue because they are smarter than you give them credit for. The notion that you'd want people to prove that they know what they're doing because you're concerned about corrupting the children--yeesh.

The best way to combat toxic positivity is to not engage in it! (heroic music)

Sure a blaster with an expensive build and some sort damage aura could probably do that. Depends on the setup. There are characters that can afk farm. Yes all the ATs are different and have different strengths and weaknesses. This particular challenge though comes across as just a hassle. I suspect this is primarily a QOL issue and there would not be a particularly big impact on performance if you made the upgrades passive, it would just be funner to play.

That makes playing a mastermind sound so attractive lol.

I see people pretty frequently requesting certain kinds of teams. Or specifying that they are looking for certain kinds of teams. And this is aside from people that are in sgs or are using their friendslists, etc. to seek out likeminded players. Moreover, that could be something that could be added to the mode, some kind of visual marker that would indicate that they were that kind of character. I think there would be plenty of options for players to navigate this and by the mid levels it wouldn't be an issue anyway. You don't need to share anything with people you don't want to. What you're actually worried about here is some degree of hypothetical inconvenience.

As opposed to the jacked up pver that runs into a mission and nukes hapless mobs with no real danger of being defeated. What your describing is people pursuing their goals the same way, it's just against other people. The problem is that pvp in this game has always been that it's a certain type of pvp mode: deathmatch. You can add incentives, you can tweak the rules, etc. but at the end of the day it's always going to be about defeating other players. And that's never going to wash with people brought up in the pve environment which is far less lethal and far more goal oriented. If I could go back in time and get the developer's ear, I would've pushed them towards a hybrid mode that incorporated actual pve objectives. I've seen this done in other games and I think it would actually work really well with coh. If things like tanking, controlling, etc, actually had meaning in the engagement and it wasn't so easy to burn other characters down, that sort of thing could be a blast.

Nope. I understand that perfectly. The reality is actually the opposite. If I make a suggestion that is too sandboxy for people's taste, individuals crawl out of the woodwork and start lecturing me about what the community is like, what it wants, why it's still here, etc. before pointing towards the door and telling me to go elsewhere.

It's not shocking to me, I find this whole experience very typical. I completely understand your reasoning above. What I don't understand is why you keep ignoring the obvious solution. Don't team with these people. It's that simple. If you don't like it, don't do it. The situation with Alpha you mention would've been the game at the start, for everyone. My proposal is for experienced players that unlock an option and are further limited with regard to enhancements. If you saddle every suggestion with the expectation that it appeals to you or else it can't happen, maybe you could do me a solid and explain what it would need to be. Thematically, gameplay wise, etc. Because the virulent opposition to an idea that I've already said I don't see happening is pretty off the hook.

The game is 20+ years of different eras of development. While the exterior world of gaming has changed as well. You're special pleading. It's game breaking when I suggest something for certain reasons you don't agree with. But it's fine if it's done for reasons you agree with. The point is not that they are the same. The point is that you made a line in the sand--this is gamebreaking--and it turns out that the current reality didn't fit with your arbitrary standard. And doomsday didn't occur. The sky didn't fall. So there's less reason to take your objections seriously, not more.

In your unsubstantiated opinion. And assuming that the game experience is some generic thing to the extent that you can say "no, people don't want that" to a proposal that you don't like. Simply based on your perception of what you and other people like you want. Honest reply. Reading your question just suggests to me how little thought you're putting into this issue. And how little empathy you have for a perspective outside your own. "If you don't like the lower level content, don't play it." I generally don't. I skip it, like a lot of people. And I can turn that around and say the exact same thing to you. If you don't like this proposal, you wouldn't be required to do it. Skip it. Find something else to do. "Why don't you leave?" Because this is where I started. This is where my friends are. And this is where I've spent a lot of time grinding shit. There are a lot of reasons why people might want some degree of innovation here in this community. These conversations for me are like arguing with cult members "if you don't accept our ways, you need to leave the community." I suspect that a vocal minority of the population would be more content with no more changes at all, ever, if it meant that their nostalgic vision of the game remained unsullied. Ask yourself that. If they just kept the servers going for the next ten years would you continue to play. If the answer is yes, then I don't think you're ever going to respond well to one of my suggestions. You're posting in bad faith and I'm looking outside the bubble of your concerns.

I was only interested in the merits. I ran it on 7 alts once, sometimes twice, a day for about a month. It's interesting to see how many people will wait a fair amount of time to get on a team for something like this rather than just starting a team and doing it themselves.

Yeah, my point is that it would be stupid and aggravating to have to do that. I agree with your proposal.

No I don't have to. I never made any claim about power shuffling. You said that any restructuring against the intended design would be game breaking "any way you slice it." Troo called you out about it and now you're shifting the goalposts.

Yes exactly. What you were describing is what you and your friends got out of the game. Fine. But then when there is a proposal that goes against what you want, you define the entire population in your terms:

That's not what you said though. You said "any way you slice it." I react to the words that you actually say. L O L.

LOL just stop. I've played this game since 2004, so for me personally your bs is not compelling. The people I play with, like me, started here because it was the earliest and largest population base that became available. The first thing we did was level up farmers, to skip the grind we've avoided since the retail days. It has nothing to do with the "experience" about which you're opining.

That's not the point. You in your great wisdom said that reordering the powers was gamebreaking "no matter how you slice it." Now with this post, you're going further in the opposite direction. It's not so much that it's game breaking, it's that you're character would actually be so underpowered that it would be weaker than the standard characters. Yeah? And? The notion that saga mode was about having an OP character was a knee jerk reaction that some people had. It was baggage that got added to this thread. I don't think these characters would be that OP, even at lower levels. And part of the reason I called it "saga mode" was that it would pose something of a challenge for people that are used to trivializing oldschool game balance through expensive enhancements.

I think a better comparison would be if a buffer cast a buff on someone and then it just randomly blinked off and then had to be recast.

This post is amusing to me because I was hammered for pages by people claiming that nobody would want to do this feature--it's nothing new, would gimp your character, etc. And at the same time, there's an acknowledgement that people actually would want to do this feature--to the extent it poses some sort of existential threat to your gameplay. First of all, why would it be such a big deal to run a Posi or whatever, and specify that you don't want this type of character on your team? It seems to me that you are rejecting an idea that you fear would be popular enough with other people to impact you solely because you don't want to be bothered taking the simple steps to rule it out. In comparison, I despise badges. I have wasted countless hours of my life in missions where we had to jump through additional hoops because somebody wanted some badge that did not benefit me in any way. But you're not going to find me anywhere on these forums weighing in on new badges because it is not what I am interested in. Secondly, maybe there is a way to reconcile what this proposal is going for with at least some of the concerns expressed by people here. As I've repeatedly stated, I acknowledge that this specific idea is extremely unlikely to happen. But it's indicative of the type of thing I think they should do--structural options that add some sort of gameplay appeal to existing content for people who would like to see something different. Maybe your shard idea would work. You could play this mode on another shard, but if you transferred back it would be in normal mode. That at least is a constructive suggestion.

Woosh. Because of exactly the reason I said. Population density. I like many people am at HC because this was the first option I became aware of and it retained the largest playerbase as far as I can tell. I'm not going to start over somewhere else because you don't like my suggestion and think I should move. Then the thread worked out for you. You're welcome. If you think those ideas are good, maybe you or the people posting them can start suggestion threads for those ideas.

Like yours, they are largely expressions of what those posters want. When you or other posters say "nobody is going to want to do this, people that farm up alts aren't going to want to do this, etc." it's just your opinion. It's not empirical fact or anything and it's kind of appalling the extent that posters will eagerly speak on behalf of thousands of players that may feel differently. The point about pvpers in BB or Siren's that someone mentioned would possibly be a hitch. But when I brought up pvp, you summarily dismissed it, waving away the "3 people that still pvp". You're all over the place. Nobody will bother with this, but it's also gambreaking. Your're whiplashing all over the place. LOL please. If you're going to go through all these contortions to put a stake in this idea, appealing to the notion that different people want different things doesn't help your case. And it's blatantly hypocritical. Apparently your free to tell me what other groups of people don't want, but when I suggest that certain groups of people might like something you're clutching your pearls. Regarding Cake, I believe the most essential thing to a server's success is density of population. Cake I don't think ever had that, so for you to use that as evidence that people don't want any of those things is just dumb. By your logic, the HC servers that are dwindling are doing something wrong because they are shrinking.

I'm playing a tank. I'm like lvl 38. I took all the powers from the primary and had to wait on the ones I wanted in the secondary. I PLed it to where I had all the powers I wanted and then started using it in missions. If this feature had been an option, I would've probably leveled it on missions from the get go. Also, we still have to missions difficulty settings. I think the the supposed steamrollering would not be as amazing as people would be making it out to be.

Once again, you assert that this will break the game without offering any justification for how that would happen. Nobody would make you do this mode. Nobody would force you to play this mode. How you progress is a big part of what has endeared the loyal fanbase to it over those 20 years? Bullshit. That's true for some people, not all. Pvpers almost always viewed this leveling progression as a hassle they had to deal with in order to pvp, which is why the temporal warrior feature was added. A lot of farmers don't give a crap about it, they are just grinding resources as efficiently as they can. PLers have experimented since release to find ways of skipping this progression. That skipping is the norm now for a lot of people--plan the character, get it to 50, then play it. It's not that I'm being obtuse. It's that you're so wrapped up in how you view things and want to play that you don't even seem to register how players are actually using the game now. And the irony is that my idea is an attempt to make that material that is being actively avoided somehow novel or interesting. Oh no, this idea will disrupt level progression--lol that ship has sailed. It's long gone. You're posturing like this is still the retail days.