battlewraith

20 minutes of time. Ok, let's imagine that we're talking about someone's commute to work. I would imagine that 20 extra minutes on the road would be a really big deal. Now a commute obviously happens more frequently than PLing new characters, but like the commute that extra 20 minutes is going to get tacked on every time a new character is leveled. I wouldn't call that negligible. But if it is truly no big deal, then why fix it? Someone's really going to tweak a variable that has been in play for (years?) and add extra time wasted on an activity just so that they have the satisfaction of correcting a mistake?

A "powerset" is a combination of animations and effects. Certain combinations already exist. The proposal is to allow players more options to mix and match and create new combinations that don't currently exist. Not sure why it's so hard for you to grasp the distinction. Lol what? So people are playing underperforming sets simply because the animations are cool? If people want to play the best sets in a given AT, they'll do it regardless of the animations. That has no bearing on this suggestion.

This isn't even an argument, just somebody dictating their lack of imagination to the rest of the playerbase. Pro: Players are given more options to realize their character concepts (eg. a vampiric version of Poison Ivy that uses plant animations but has the darkness effects). Con: Rudra doesn't like it for some reason.

Yeah we want to get people out of AE, so let's nerf the boosters so that it takes longer to pl....so that people spend longer on the farm.....in AE..... These changes, the merit conversion nerf in particular, will do nothing to players who have serious farming routines or regularly make billions on the market. It will fuck over casual players who basically farm when they need to outfit a new alt and who used emp merits to buy enhancements because they don't have tons of cash lying around. If anything, it will probably make afk farming more mandatory, since a substantial amount of players can't commit to continuous blocks of playtime to do the content that the devs apparently want people to be doing.

For the purposes of this discussion, it's like the difference between Superman and Clark Kent. Superman doesn't have a job OR wear glasses!

I remember a friend in 1979 having the 18" Kenner xenomorph action figure. The dark plastic bubble head popped off revealing the skull underneath lol. As for the science, Alien is a horror movie. The whole point is that this thing is alien: it doesn't make sense, and is constantly changing. Viewing it scientifically is missing the point--which is why ALL of the subsequent films go off the rails and just turn into action/suspense flicks. Viewing it in terms of Giger's art, I'd say the thing is a kind of metaphor for rape.

Maybe it's actually a marketing campaign for this new film?

I've got an invite to the Midjourney beta a while back. It's one of the AI art programs that creates imagery based on a prompt you give it. I thought I'd see if it could do something inline with my OC. I gave it the prompt "beautiful blond devil girl holding a flaming skull." I shouldn't have said "girl" because it actually took that literally. Also for some reason instead of "holding a flaming skull" it added skull features to her face. Despite the distortions, it kicked out some interesting imagery:

Lol what? Said something they didn't like I guess? It's not like I know a lot of these people.

Yeah that happened to me after I posted in this thread. Someone gave me seven thumbs down in a couple of threads from two or three months ago. Lol.

I get the feeling though that a fair amount of the people that are never going let the "lying to the community" thing go are the same people who will turn around and remind me that this small volunteer dev team doesn't owe me anything (the next time I complain about not getting something I want).

But he can do all that right now can't he? Lol don't get hung up on the analogy here my dude--you know the whole conversation revolves around reducing rewards to cause a change in behavior. Also I made the same Troo joke recently 🥸.

How is changing the rewards granted for different content not them telling people how to play? Troo you're fired. But i am in no way telling you that you can't come in here and do the work for free.

If the change is aimed at dedicated farmers, afk farmers, etc. those people will adapt. The ones that will be affected by this are more likely casual players. The ones identified as "the problem" will likely suffer no major inconvenience, whereas the people who sometimes farm when the need hits them will lose resources they previously had available to them. Unless they want to run a bunch of additional content that may or may not be attractive to them.

If rewards are the only thing that matters, why take measures to penalize players for settling on the most convenient pathway to get those rewards?

Fun? Every time I read a comment like this, I wonder if it's a tacit admission that the general gameplay isn't engaging.

You're doing something wrong.

So it's our natural state? "In such condition, there is no place for industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving, and removing, such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." What's the solution? I think it boils down to rational thought, no? And thinking well is better than thinking poorly.

1. Disgruntled people cite some inner circle conspiracy. 2. Skeptics laugh it off--that sort of thing doesn't happen. 3. People point out that something like that did happen--ie the private secret server. 4. Skeptic shifts the goalposts-- Someone did something bad once so everyone must be doing bad things all the time. I think there are better answers to these circumstances than conspiracies. And there are better ways to answer conspiracy claims than glib distortions of what those people are actually suggesting.

The vote is a joke to begin with. The majority of the playerbase does not spend a lot of time on the forums. Among those that do, a fraction of them are going to be following this discussion. The ones that ARE following it are likely to be more ideologically invested in it--particularly people that want to nerf farming. The jokes about the inner cabal and "hey it's me on 20 different accounts" are idiotic. The fact that there is no secret insider conspiracy doesn't mean their aren't blocs of players who pressure the direction of development to suit their interests, in some cases more successfully than others. The fact that there aren't 3 people on 20 different accounts responding to a poll, doesn't mean that there might be several instances of people voting more than once--which in a poll with around 60 responses is significant.

This is a suggestion forum Flea, not a place for you to share parenting tips. Next you're going to be asking for /fine-them-a-quarter. edit: kidding in case that isn't obvious.

Cool style!

If I'm understanding this correctly, the thought experiment is to get an idea of to what extent the "nerf AE farming" contingent actually reflects the interests of the Homecoming playerbase. The size of the other servers isn't a good indication of how popular different changes would be on Homecoming because: 1. There are historically contingent reasons for those servers to be smaller that don't have anything to do with the contnet of those teams. 2. A primary motivation for joining a server seems to be population size. So players will naturally flock to servers that are more populated, and move to more populated shards within those servers, as we saw on Freedom and now on Excelsior.

I've never given a thumbs down, I wonder how common that is on these forums.

Using a fire farmer on a fire map is less risky in the same way that pounding a nail with a hammer is less risky than wacking it with a piece of wood or something. I'm not disagreeing with you about the results. I think the disagreement is about the notion of risk. Playing well in coh in general is about preparation. If you're going to do a certain task, the majority of the "risk" involves bringing the right characters, knowing the steps of the TF (or being able to follow instructions), etc. For the vast majority of this games content, if you can do that prep then you can reasonably expect to successfully complete that mission with little difficulty. Bringing a fire farmer on a S/L map isn't risky, because the outcome is pretty straightforward whether or not you play well. If you want real risk in this game, court the unforeseen: play with drunks, sext with the tank, etc. Also in general you've been striking this moderate pose: I don't want to get rid of farming, I just don't want it to be soooo good. Well how good do you want it to be? Is the answer to that question something that can be arrived at objectively somehow? I'm very skeptical of campaigns to slow down the pace at which people do things and I'm not seeing any positive justification being offered for how this will be an improvement.