golstat2003

well I would argue your first paragraph does have to do with people. Not sure how far they can move into new processes or programs (that would expand the pool of people who could volunteer) if the current engine and coding for COH won’t allow it. I assume they are limited in how modern they can make some processes.

The bolded is also part of why I made this post. More Human Resources (volunteers) might move some specific things along.

I’m not seeing anything here that can’t eventually be done. Eventually as in years from now now and hours of manpower. Done quickly? Not in the least. But that doesn’t matter. If they ever decide to pick this up then we just wait. Again good suggestions.

I can't think of any reason why not too. Placing these on a tank (as long as they don't override Tank or Brute aggro) would be interesting.

I would NOT say no to this.

I would laugh out loud, as that would be diabolical.

The solution is for them to implement a Null the gull option that ONLY limits YOUR judgement. Not everyone elses.

sure, we would never throw you out a window (sharpens long butcher knife in the back room. . . For . . . Reasons. . . ) 😈

Terrible idea. Let's not go back to the idiocy that was the Live Market.

I agree with both suggestions.

MOAR pets is always nice. lol

This one sounds like a good idea.

I don't think the GMs are ever going to agree to that. But good luck though.

Interestingly here is a link also to the original thread discussion on this, from the COH forums archive. (Thanks to @Michiyo for keeping that archive alive) Both and interesting discussion and sad (soon after this this discussion started on the upcoming proc changes explained by Synapse, the announcement of the sunset came). https://forumarchive.cityofheroes.dev/topic/288581

Thanks for taking on this project. It's a worthwhile endeavor. I unfortunately only speak english.

To stop feature creep like macskull and others have pointed out I would STRONGLY argue that we actually need 3 (or 4-5 if TINY, if focused on ONE major feature) SMALL sized pages instead of 1-2. Get the strongest features out faster. Clear the closed beta, open beta out faster to get the next one in faster. The longer these things stay in closed, the longer there is for feature creep to happen. IMO, you can't do smaller but more frequent with anything larger than small. Anything larger than that just isn't going to work if we are looking for "frequent releases = huge W". Not with the amount of sphaghetti code this game has. And it has nothing to do with the size of the team, and all to do with the buggy ass code this game is still based on.

I agree. Various other threads the last few days, folks seems to imply that the devs were too slow in implementing suggestions.

Fulcrum shift. The damage buff is unmatched.

All great responses folks. This was an interesting discussion. I’d actually bet more folks are fine with the speed of the updates than not, based on the comments in this thread.

Pretty much howI feel about the speed at which they are doing things. But over the last few days I’ve gotten the impression that some folks think they are moving too slow.

One constant over the last few days is how fast we get changes made to the game. So far we've gotten maybe 1 or 2 pages/issues per year. At that pace any suggested change made (either on the forums or discord) could take years to implement when the devs decide to pick some up (if they decide to, really at their discretion). Now we have had threads, announcements from the dev team asking for help for years, on the forums and Discord. Hell barely anyone even tests changes, to the point that some things that need a massive amount of testing (labyrinth anyone?) hardly get enough mass testing while in Closed and Open beta. So the question is how else would YOU the player suggest the devs get more resources (aka people) to make the changes, test things, and create content/updates that eventually go into pages/issues? Saying pay people, as per my understanding, is out of the question as this project is remaining a volunteer one funded by donations. Sooooooo any OTHER suggestions I'm interested in folks stating.

Pretty much the same. I would advise anyone and everyone using suggestion boxes at work (digital or not) to assume they ARE NOT anonymous. Also pretty much in every job I've been at the suggestion box has required you to put you department. That in of itself is problematic. Back on topic, unless we are willing to get the devs more resources or volunteers as devs ourselves, the time line for implementation of suggestions is what it is.

That's exactly the pushback you got. You think it's stupid. Others disagree and have said so. All opinion and no facts on either side. Devs said it's not stupid. As far as I know it's only their opinion that matters despite the pages of discussion.

I’ve tried levelless games and did not enjoy any of the ones I tried. The rest of the suggestion sounds okay if you somehow take that part out.

If feasible, why not. Sounds like some good ideas.