battlewraith
-
Posts
676 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by battlewraith
-
-
2 hours ago, Rudra said:
Yes. The wall of quotes that included two quotes from the author to highlight what you were defending so emphatically. The idea you were arguing needed to be implemented that you are now saying you were not arguing to have implemented. That wall of quotes.
No you are a liar, The quotes from myself alone don't say what you and Stych are claiming. They are not defenses of his ideas, they me arguing for the type of utility I see possibly coming out of this change. That's why my first quote you list is what, 2 weeks after his? Unbelievable. Didn't think my opinion of you could be lower champ but you did it. You broke through the floor.
This was my first post in the thread, which you downvoted:
QuoteOkay, so I think the general consensus here is that confront is worthless on a scrapper. So let's focus on that.
Is a gap closer a good idea? Yeah could be cool. Could look cool. Could free up a power pool slot and allow for some cool builds that are not currently possible. These are legitimate reasons for consideration.
What about the objections?
1. Thematic. Why would a character with say a staff be teleporting? Grow an imagination. Maybe the staff is magical or shoots out a grappling hook or something. The game is already full of weird powers that don't make a lot of sense (eg. the blaster martial arts secondary that lets you teleport).
2. You can achieve the same effects with power pools.
So what? First of all, anyone can get a crappy taunt from pools. Secondly, I might be looking to make some kooky ass build that doesn't take the pool powers that would get me this effect. What happened to the "play your own way" ethos? People that arguing that pool powers already let you build for this are basically just saying that you should share their preferences.
3, It's not faster.
Again, so what. There's a difference between the speed of a movement and the experience of using it. Also your build might have SS but no other travel power. The vertical movement from the gap closer could have a lot of utility. You might have no travel powers and want to pretend your batman scooting around with a grappling hook.It makes no reference to his posts. It only deals with scrappers. And it doesn't have anything to do with optimizing for the "big 4 powers." Liars. Don't know why I'm surprised.
-
2 hours ago, InvaderStych said:
As has already been demonstrated in a wall of quotes of your posts, this is, literally, what you are arguing/asking for. I am sorry that you cannot see that.
Oh you mean the wall of quotes that is not all me? The one where he mixed in quotes from somebody else? That wall?
You people are something else.
-
1 hour ago, arcane said:
I literally searched the forums and quoted a dev to avoid a post like this being considered a valid response. But I guess the devs’ own words on design vision have no weight.
It has weight. But it's not the silver bullet you think it is. Even Jimmy's post was more flexible on this issue than I was expecting.
-
2 hours ago, arcane said:
So, again, you don’t get to claim that we’re making equal and opposite arguments. You want to take existing core functions of powers away from players, and we don’t.
You're assuming more than I am. I have a hard time thinking that makes your position stronger. I also think this tendency to speak as if one knows the minds of the devs or the overall health of the game is irrelevant for the purposes of discussing ideas. They will do what they want anyway. Posters shouldn't have license to talk out of their ass and deride other people's ideas because they are secretly roleplaying the devs.
-
1 hour ago, InvaderStych said:
5 pages of circular discussion surrounding your insistence that you get access to both the power you want and the 4 pools of your choice is not going to get the job done.
Except you're lying. I never insisted that I wanted a power and access to 4 pools of choice. You're inferring that because it's part of this "big 4" conspiracy you've got going on. I just said that a perk would be more build varieties. That might involve builds that take fewer power pool options.
1 hour ago, InvaderStych said:Not everyone agrees with this position; furthermore it is beside the point. What *you* see as useful/useless is not as important as the overall health of game-play. Granting scrappers a gap closing ability that already exists in 4 different available pools simply reinforces existing meta and does nothing to evolve builds towards different solutions than the "Big 4 pools."
This is a simple point, yet seems impossible for some people to understand. The proposed power DOES NOT exist. The point of this thread should be to ideate what that power would be. Yes gap closers already exist. Other things also exist. "I want to propose a new scrapper set. It has attacks." "No." "Why?" "We already have a bunch of scrapper sets and they have attacks."
Also, faulting this suggestion because it doesn't evolve builds away from the "Big 4 pools"--who stated that this was a particular goal of this change? Again, you're projecting on to the proposal.
2 hours ago, InvaderStych said:This is as much of an admission of my assertion as I'm going to get in this thread, and it is all that is needed. Emphasis mine.
Sad. Really disingenuous. Two sentences later I said this:
"I'm not going to ask for a change to a specific power, of a specific AT in order to get the general flexibility I want."
You are truly desperate to not engage honestly and hear what you want.
-
1 hour ago, InvaderStych said:
That's an outright deflection and you know it. 😛
No, not really. I think you're stifling discussion based on a set of assumptions and pre-drawn conclusions. So you and others could maybe put together a group document that lists all the ships you think have already sailed. That way people who get fired up about an idea could read it and have their enthusiasm immediately squashed without putting in the effort of trying to pitch something to an unsympathetic audience. For example, I went back and forth a bit with arcane about this idea. Then after some exchanges, he mentioned that he didn't want anything that would buff scrapers in terms of attacks or utility. Well that would've been good to know from the outset because the specifics of the provoke argument are irrelevant to his overall stance on the AT.
I don't have a specific build in mind. I've often had issues trying to fit in everything I need in terms of pool choices in one build, but that's a general concern. I think there should be more options in general. I'm not going to ask for a change to a specific power, of a specific AT in order to get the general flexibility I want. I'm generally interested in a replacement for what a see as a generally useless ability (taunt) on the scrapper. AND I'm curious to see what kind of build options open up as a result.
-
1 hour ago, InvaderStych said:
Dude, settle down. Seriously. Completely unnecessary.
I thought it was funny lol.
1 hour ago, InvaderStych said:Please don't be obtuse for the sake of continuing this nonsensical argument. There are 4 (maybe 5) different options available for creating a gap closer among various power pools. Please stop talking around your desire to get one of those options without sacrificing a precious "Meta Pool". It is not going to happen. That ship sailed two years ago. Either use one of the available gap closing options or don't.
Sure, maybe you could give me a list of all the other things that are not to be considered for...reasons. Thx.
1 hour ago, arcane said:1. Uh, no, you and the other folks have literally stated that it would be nice to not have to dip into a power pool. Do you need people to quote things at you again.
2. It would work both ways if our positions were equal. But the Cottage Rule plainly dictates that precedence is given to that functionality which already exists, so “no u” doesn’t work here because the burden is entirely on you to explain why Scrappers are in such a dire place that we need to completely take a core functionality of a power out of a set completely.
3. K
1. Quote away if that's your thing. Just only quote me, I'm not responsible for other people's comments. Saying that it would be nice to not dip into a power pool is not the same as saying this change would be good with respect to easing build restrictions. There is a lot more to unpack in the latter.
2. The cottage rule was coined by Castle back in 2007. He made plenty of boneheaded decisions and is no longer a developer for this game. So it might be your preference to adhere to this philosophy, but that's all it is. It's a bad dogma in light of gaming in 2022 imo.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, arcane said:
Also the irrefutable, objective, supported-by-evidence truth:
(1) you have over and over taken the position that you don’t like the proposed solution of simply picking up your preferred gap closer from a power pool because you don’t want to have to invest one of your 4 power pool picks for that. You want something added to Scrapper primaries instead (which does not yet exist and is not yet being enjoyed by any players). I don’t love this argument on its own but then…
…(2) you have over and over suggested to those that want to keep Confront (which already exists and is enjoyed by some players apparently)… that they simply pick up a comparable power from a power pool and address their issue by investing one of their 4 power pool picks. As if that wasn’t enough……
……(3) you have over and over acted completely oblivious to the transparent hypocrisy and undeniable selfishness of simultaneously taking both positions (1) and (2), and it’s completely mind boggling that you apparently think this is a good look.
As Bill said: dildos.
1. Wrong. My position is that confront is lame and something cooler could be there as an option. If the option in question is a gap closer, that could free up some build options.
2. I have over and over again reflected back the same "you can just pick X pool" argument back at you. You and others fail to see that it cuts both ways simply because you are used to things being a certain way.
3. Well you have to understand. I think you just have such an ingrained status quo mindset that you don't really get the point I'm trying to make. I also really really couldn't care less what you think my look is.
Also: get Bill's dildos out of your mouth. This is a family friendly forum.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, InvaderStych said:
My friend, you are talking a very long walk around the bush of "I want to take Combat Teleport without Sacrificing my Meta Pools!" by using words like "expanded build options." Let it go.
No that's the thing. It's not about combat teleport. People just assume that and say "well take combat teleport." That's how stupid this conversation has been.
What exactly this gap closer is and does has not been really adequately been fleshed out. In an ideal world people would steelmanning this idea and maybe coming up with some interesting suggestions that, if not appropriate for this case might be added elsewhere. Instead you get naysayers just defaulting to a known quantity (eg. combat teleport) and just trying to kill off discussion because they apparently think that's the ideal contribution.
-
1 hour ago, Luminara said:
The people supporting the idea have said, "I shouldn't have to take a pool power because <REASONS!>", and "Other people should have to take a pool power because <REASONS!>". These comments were made. Not implied, not inferred, outright stated. Pointing out the monumental hypocrisy of bitching because you have to take a pool power to do something, and simultaneously declaring that other people should have to take a pool power to do something just so you don't have to, is not exaggeration or casting aspersion, it's highlighting the arrogance of the tiny minority who made those statements.
If you shouldn't have to take a pool power to do something, then neither should anyone else. If "they can just take a pool power" is sufficient justification for your request to change the tame so you don't have to take a pool power, then your justification is applicable to your own request, you can can just take a pool power. Expecting the game to change to suit your whims, and everyone to meekly submit because it's what you want, is arrogant, entitled and selfish. And that's not judgmental, it's objective observation.
You are not the center of this world. Deal with it.
This is you being a drama queen. That is the objective truth.
Pretty much everyone has to take pool powers to do things and this entails limitations in building. The idea idea of doing something to a power that is very skippable to make it a more attractive pick and free up build options seems like a good suggestion. For the devs. IN A SUGGESTION FORUM. Supporting a suggestion like this is not "expecting the game to change to suit my whims." I don't expect anything. And sidestepping the shrieking harpy who lacks the capacity to see how anyone could actually reasonably want something like this is not me being arrogant, entitled, and selfish. It's just Thursday on the Homecoming forums. Lighten the hell up lol.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Luminara said:
The responses aren't negative because we're opposed to using pool powers, they're negative because the fundamental argument, the very foundation of the proposal, is, "I shouldn't have to take a pool power to do something, but everyone else should. Change the game so I can have more options, even if it's accomplished by taking options away from others. Give me the ability to have everything I want in a single package and to hell with the intended and designed limitations of the game, those should only apply to other players."
Well that's your exaggerated and judgmental hot take. Best to shoot down an idea you don't like by casting aspersions on the people suggesting it.
The idea here is that there is a scrapper power that is generally skipped in builds, and is described by adherents as niche but useful. The suggestion is to change that into a gap closer. The proposed benefit is a possibly useful less niche power and expanded build options. The downside is that players who like having a single target taunt in their scrapper builds would lose this and have to go with a pool option. How many people would that be? Would the benefits outweigh the drawbacks? Those are questions for the devs. It's a suggestion. You don't like it, fine. You stated that. The fact that you think people are throwing temper tantrums over this (though maybe Greycat did) makes me suspect that you don't get enough pushback on your ideas.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Rudra said:
The point was that if a power is being taken and used by players, then you cannot simply ignore them for the sake of implementing change.
And what is "people are already negatively impacted by the status quo, regardless of what the status quo is. There are things that are possible and impossible under the current state of affairs." even supposed to mean in this conversation? Because the status quo is viewed negatively by some it should be changed without regard for those who view it positively, thereby simply changing who is negatively impacted? THAT is your reasoning?! Seriously?!
You have a history of powers being taken, used by players, and then changed throughout the history of this game. I shouldn't have to details nerfs and changes that have transpired in the game. The simple fact that players might be using a power does not make that power sacred and immune from future changes, That has never been the case.
The comments about the status quo relate to the sense of entitlement people have about their builds. You might like the way things are structured now. That doesn't mean that there isn't a better way to structure things-one that may be blocked by how things are structured now. Improving the game should be the number one priority. That should take into account how players feel about the current mechanics, but development shouldn't be stymied by people who basically only care about what they want and don't want to be impacted by ANY change.
1 hour ago, Rudra said:Sure. It doesn't affect anyone's current build. Except for those using Confront already and with no desire to suddenly find themselves there with the enemies.
Yeah...when I said "it doesn't affect anyone's current build" I was referencing something he said. Maybe go back and read it.
2 hours ago, Rudra said:Let's assume for the moment it is not worthless. The idea then is to make it into something worthless for those already using it.
No, not necessarily. It will be worthless as a taunt. Depending on the implementation it could be a cool power
option. Some people might skip it, others might (gasp) adapt their playstyle.
2 hours ago, Rudra said:Do you have any arguments that are not so fallible or at least so inclined to ignore the fact it is currently being used by players even if you consider it an outdated holdover? Which by the way is your opinion and not a given.
Is there a reason I should be trying to convince you? My impression is that you like to hold court over the suggestions thread and give people grief over their ideas. Remember the "monkey themed mastermind" thread? Where you kept saying things like "pass", "hard pass", "no thanks", etc. until the poster was so disgusted they swore off their own post and had it deleted? That was you wasn't it? People get all excited about an idea, come here to share it, and get shot down by the usual suspects. And you never leave, despite getting people's hopes up:
Less fun? Like the couple of seconds it takes to close with an enemy? *sigh* I'm going to heed Widower's advice. I'm dropping out of this thread.
-
1 hour ago, arcane said:
If you don’t have a problem asking players to dip into a power pool, you have no argument. The OP even acknowledged that the entire case hinged on “having to pick a different power pool = bad”. If you don’t have a problem asking players to dip into a power pool, every single player has access to several gap closers already.
It's not about, for me at least, getting a gap closer. Obviously, everyone has access to that. The part of the initial post that resonated with me related to replacing scrapper confront with a gap closer. The taunt is generally speaking worthless in the current state of the game. YMMV. Indulge me. Let's assume for the moment that it's worthless. The idea is then to make it into something more useful/interesting/etc. The OP suggested a gap closer. Now even if that revamped power is just a copy of combat teleport, it would free up certain power choices and allow an increase in build diversity. And it could potentially be different in some way that be better/funner/etc. than those pool power choices. Scrappers would still have access to taunt via pools.
The counter argument is "leave the power alone because some players still like using it." That could be said about anything. People are saying to just take the pool powers--well scrappers could take the pool taunt. The vitriolic response against that is a tacit acknowledgement of the OP's general concern. Taking a pool you don't want for something you think you need is a drag. My hot take is that there would be more overall benefit to scrappers in general from a revamp/replacement of the taunt power than keeping this outdated off-tank feature. The two perspectives are not equivalent and the way things are now is more restrictive and frankly boring.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Greycat said:
To change it in a way that makes it *objectively worse.*
I, currently, can taunt one problematic mob out of a group. I do not need to take a power pool to do that. Turning this into a "closer" putting me *into the middle of the mob I'm trying to remove a problematic single mob from* makes that impossible. It is objectively worse. If I wanted to move into the middle of the group, I would use... sprint. Or my travel power. Or combat teleport, which, if I feel is useful, I can take out of a power pool *and use as the situation demands.*
The nice thing is, my way... affects *nobody's current build.* And keeps a useful power useful. And no, I don't care what 95% of scrappers do or don't do. Loud people insist you MUST be perma-this, capped-that, take hasten in every build, etc. too. Strangely, the game is perfectly playable and enjoyable without any of that. I don't care what any of *them* say, either.
Frankly, sounds like the OP needs to stop worrying about what other games do and play COH.
No. To make it *objectively different.*
It doesn't affect anybody's current build. The change is aimed at potential builds. The devs could simply not change anything ever again. That would also preserve your current build.
What I'm hearing is that the OP needs to stop worrying about what they want and spend more time worrying about what you want.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, arcane said:
Are you seriously implying that you have a problem with the exact verbatim argument you yourself were just quoted making two posts up? I’m actually impressed, bold strategy 🙂
[EDIT: to be fair, context suggests maybe you aren’t crazy about this argument yourself, but you are certainly in favor of *someone* having to reach into an extra power pool as long as it’s not yourself. My head is spinning.]
No, I suspect you're simply not following the argument.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Rudra said:
Okay, let's try a different approach, @battlewraith.
I don't take or use aim. I have been told on occasion by other players it is a less than useful power and they would rather it was replaced by Build Up or another power. Are you okay with Aim being replaced? We have Tactics in the Leadership pool we can take.
I don't take the T9 power for most armors. I have also been told in the occasional chat that the T9s are useless. Would you be okay with replacing those?
I have been told while playing my MM that the T1 pets are useless and all MMs should take a more useful power in their place. Are you okay with replacing the T1 pets of MMs?
Pick any power common to an AT. Now ask if you are okay with replacing it.
If your answer to any of those is "No", then why are you so cavalier about replacing Confront?
It does not matter how many or few players take and use a power. Players are taking and using those powers. And this thread is asking to force those players to have to re-build their characters, maybe even completely re-plan their characters if they already have 4 pool sets on those characters, and you are fine with it because it does not negatively impact you.
As opposed to having players take the available powers to do what they want as is already incorporated into the game.
(Before anyone goes to crucify me for those examples, while the chats did happen, I am not saying to replace any of them. Sorry if that is the impression I am giving.)
So first off, what I'm supporting in some way is replacing a power with basically the same power. None of your examples are equivalent. Aim is not tactics. The T9 powers from sets are not available in pools. Nevertheless, I'm certainly open to re-evaluation of things like T9s, tier one pets, etc. Why would I not be? Because some players, despite what the general consensus of the community might be at this stage of the game insist on playing their characters the same way they have been for over a decade?
It does not matter how many or few players take and use a power. Players are taking and using those powers. And this thread is asking to force those players to have to re-build their characters, maybe even completely re-plan their characters if they already have 4 pool sets on those characters, and you are fine with it because it does not negatively impact you.
This is the part you don't get. People are already negatively impacted by the status quo, regardless of what the status quo is. There are things that are possible and impossible under the current state of affairs. So some people use their scrapper to taunt, which dates back to an era of the game when characters in general were far more squishy and taunting was more necessary. The general proposal here is to replace scrapper taunt with something more interesting--the specific proposal is a gap closer of some sort. This would open up build options and scrappers could still get the pool power version. It's up to the current devs to evaluate the pros and cons of enacting some sort of change like this. But it's not cavalier to want or expect things to change over time. Shooting down ideas based on their impact on niche playstyles--might as well not take suggestions relating to things like powersets.
-
1
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Luminara said:
If you need a teleport, just grab one from the pool powers.
IKR less options is more?
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Greycat said:
Read your own sentence a few times until you achieve understanding.
Then re-read the *multiple* posts explaining the loss of functionality for something much *less* useful, and *why* it's much less useful.
Bonus points for reading my prior post re: the results of the live devs wanting to remove powers from patron pools.
Again. Something maybe much less useful to YOU. The arguments about a gap closer being redundant are also completely missing the point. If I take this power or this power or another power, I can get there faster than a teleport. What if I don't want to take those powers? What if my build doesn't have vertical mobility and the gap closer fills that hole. What if I legitimately have some issues moving my character in other ways and want something to allow precision placement (again without being committed to the teleport pool)? I have a character with no +perception. If the gap closer was an aoe attack of some sort, it would help me deal with hidden targets. As it stands, confront does nothing for me. What if you found out that 95% of scrappers skip confront? Would you still be making this argument?
I read you prior post. I think the actions of the devs in that beta and the reaction of the players then is pretty irrelevant. This is a proposal to change (not remove) one power option.
-
3 hours ago, Greycat said:
The OP's suggestion removes functionality and *completely changes* what those powers do for something that is (A)unwanted, (B) not helpful and (C) duplicates functionality that can already be picked up in a power pool pick. In fact, it doesn't even "cost" a power, as the OP obviously doesn't want confront - which means there's a freed up power pick there which can be used to pick up combat teleport, teleport, or (if they already are in the leaping pool) spring attack. (Of course, it doesn't address the "And add it to assassin's strike, too!" which is just pants-on-head ridiculous.)
Also, my defense of the status quo here and extreme dislike of the suggestion means *nobody's playstyle is changed.* Nobody has to dip into a power pool (and rebuild a build they already like, possibly a more extensive rebuild if they already have four pools chosen) to *retain functionality they already have.*
If you don't see the difference there, don't know what to tell ya.
The OP's suggestion is:
(A) Obviously wanted by someone or else they wouldn't have bothered posting it.
(B) Maybe not helpful to you? I could see uses for it.
(C) Duplicates functionality. Sure, with benefits that you are ignoring. And the idea that someone can just pick up a power pool is true in your direction as well. If you lose your taunt, just grab one from the pool powers.
The crux of the issue is not about defending the status quo so that "nobody's playstyle is changed." You're defending the status quo so that your build preference remains unchanged. Nothing about this suggestion means you can't taunt on your scrapper.
I haven't taken taunt on a scrapper in years. I can't remember the last time I teamed with a scrapper that was taunting. IMO to a lot of people, confront on a scrapper is a worthless power. So do you change it into something more interesting that frees up some build options or keep it the same for the faction that wants to keep things the way they have been from the onset. My vote is the former. That's me stating my preference. I get what your preference is. I don't fault you for wanting to have things your own way. But be honest about it. Don't crap on the idea and cop this attitude like it's somehow objectively bad and not worth discussing. If you don't want to discuss it, then don't. This game has gone through waves and waves of buffs, nerfs, and changes. Some were good, some were bad, and many were player driven. Some of these changes ruined the enjoyability of certain character builds for me. I didn't then park myself in the suggestions section and start pissing on ideas I didn't like. Not that you're the worst in this regard. On the contrary, I think you're one of the more reasonable posters on this board, but I think you're being very myopic here.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Greycat said:
If you feel it's "essential" to your playstyle, you have options. Do not force your playstyle on everyone else who's been doing just fine without it, thanks.
If this change went through and you lost your taunt, you would have options. You are rejecting this idea because it runs contrary to what you feel is essential to YOUR playstyle. And you are doing exactly what you are asking them not to do--you are forcing your preferences on other people who would like to have other options. Now if the idea of your scrapper having to take taunt from a pool is horrible and somehow detrimental to your build philosophy--well is it that hard to relate to people who feel saddled with a worthless taunt power that could be something cooler like a gap closer? I definitely have builds that could use that. But it's not worth consideration because someone wants to taunt a grate?
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Bill Z Bubba said:
And the population will plummet to the point where the devs won't get enough donations to keep the servers running. I'd quit JUST on the nerf to the solo incarnate path.
Same. I feel like this is the obvious outcome.
Frankly, a lot of the content that people are skipping just sucks. It was engaging back in 2004, not so much now. I did a Synapse TF the other day. I was the only one on the team actually in the appropriate level range. And good thing for that because I only had a few weak attacks as we spent close to 2 hours clearing out warehouse after warehouse full of clockwork. Most of the mission content is like this--clear a map, talk to a contect, click a glowie, clear another map, etc. For a lot of people I think the magic of the game is not the content, but seeing how their character ideas play out in different conditions. Traditional slow, dutiful leveling is largely antithetical to this.
-
2
-
2
-
-
Homecoming needs to partner with a larger organization that has extensive connections to the types of people that would find this game and this community relatable.
-
7
-
-
2 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:
Being watched over by people who can't follow simple logic, refuse to admit that they're ever wrong, and who don't adhere to their own rules doesn't bother me at all.
1 hour ago, arcane said:My favorite was when I asked them a direct easy yes/no question about whether or not something is considered in the balance/design process that would’ve quickly resolved a very contentious forum argument, and their response was to delete the non-contentious post because it was surrounded by contentious posts. Basically telling me they’d rather have the conflict.
You see me now, a veteran
Of a thousand psychic wars
I've been living on the edge so long
Where the winds of limbo roar
And I'm young enough to look at
And far too old to see
All the scars are on the inside-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Bionic_Flea said:
Please don't call him Shirley.
I struggled, won my willpower roll, and refrained from saying it.
-
2
-
1
-
Change Confront and Assassin's Strike into a distance-closing attack
in Suggestions & Feedback
Posted
Connecting my statements, made at a later date, to his and saying that I am defending his ideas is lying. You are not showing context, you are stripping away things that were actually said in the discussion. And I've made it clear elsewhere that I have only been speaking for myself.
Saying that a gap closer could be cool, look cool, and could free up a power slot is not the same as same saying that a power needs to be changed so that somebody can get all their desired pool powers. In that post I talk about jumping around like Batman with no other travel powers. Of course that doesn't help your narrative so you're ignoring it.
The only basis for the perception you keep droning about is utter lack of reading comprehension and dishonesty, now that i'm pointing at what I actually said. You got this wrong. Stop with the bullshit.