nDervish

i think you can just do: ;holdtorch Yup. ";boombox" and ";dance" (no "em") get used quite frequently when I'm waiting for teams to assemble.

I'd like to see an answer to this as well. I've seen other MMOs which required you to re-accept the EULA whenever they pushed a client update or when the text of the EULA changed, but never one which required you to re-accept it every single time you start the client, even if nothing has changed since the last time you accepted it. I literally just re-enabled the EULA handling code that COH had for years. ShouldShowEULA() in uiLogin.c if you want to check the source at OuroDev. Huh, ok. Strange. Maybe my memory's just foggy (it has been some years since the NCSoft days), but I don't remember City giving me the EULA on every login back in the day.

Sage advice. No matter how well you know the general concepts involved, do not play at being a lawyer in an area, or a jurisdiction, in which you are not fully-qualified (licensing, bar exams, etc.) to practice, lest your attempts come back to bite you in the hindquarters. I'd like to see an answer to this as well. I've seen other MMOs which required you to re-accept the EULA whenever they pushed a client update or when the text of the EULA changed, but never one which required you to re-accept it every single time you start the client, even if nothing has changed since the last time you accepted it.

My warshade is in the upper teens, had Null turn off the extra tray, and has followed the warshade story arcs up to that point with no problems. I guess it's possible I just haven't hit the problem mission yet, or it could be in the peacebringer arcs instead of the warshade arcs... but I think it's most likely that there's no actual problem.

It's pretty trivial, if you know Perl. Here's one I just threw together in (literally - I timed it) 7 minutes, including testing: #!/usr/bin/env perl use strict; use warnings; use 5.010; my $bind_file_name = './taunt.txt'; my @taunts = ( 'Hey, ugly!', 'My name is $name. You killed my father. Prepare to die.', 'You are going DOWN!', ); while (1) { open my $out, '>', $bind_file_name or die "Failed to open $bind_file_name: $!"; my $taunt = $taunts[rand @taunts]; say $out qq(t "say $taunt\$\$bindloadfile $bind_file_name"); close $out; sleep 5; } Change $bind_file_name to the name of the file (including full path, just to be safe) you want the taunt bind to be written to. Add all your taunts to the list under "my @taunts = (". Change the text inside the "qq()" if you want to bind to a key other than "t" or if you want the text sent to a specific channel instead of using "say". Change the 5 in "sleep 5" to the number of seconds you want to pass between taunt changes. Then just run it[1] and it will continue running forever (or until you hit ctrl-c to kill the program), changing the taunt file every 5 seconds. [1] Note that "just run it" assumes you already have Perl installed. Installing Perl is left as an exercise for the reader.

Being a programmer myself, and reading between the lines in comments I've seen from SCORE and others who have looked at the City code, I'm pretty confident that "quite extensive" is an understatement here. Additionally, making the code support both "unique character" and "character@global" variations would just add further complexity to the code itself and to the process of testing it, so running some shards one way and some shards the other way is unlikely to be a viable option. Given these things, I can't imagine that SCORE would be interested in undertaking the work involved unless they intended to impose "character@global" naming on everyone.

You don't even need a spreadsheet to track it. The Character Select screen already tells you how many days it's been since each character was last used. I've been using that from the start to help me rotate through all my alts - most of the time, I don't have a specific character I'm looking to play, so I look through the list and play whoever has been idle the longest.

That's my theory, or at least that it's something operating-system-install specific. I play on a dual-boot Win7/Linux laptop and, on the same hardware, same network connection, same install directory, same everything-except-operating-system, my character list comes up near-instantaneously in Linux but takes tens of seconds up to a couple minutes(? - I haven't actually timed the upper bound) in Win7. And I play primarily on Reunion (because I'm EU-side), so high server pop or any kind of queuing is not the issue. I've seen the same delay in Win7 shortly after a server restart, when the status page shows only 150-200 players connected. (Unfortunately, I am no longer able to run comparative tests. I can't get winetricks to install dinput8 for me, so the CoH client stopped working following the update that was issued when they relocated all the servers.)

If such a thing were to be added, I would sincerely hope that it would be added as an option (via P2W vendor?), so that I would be able to turn it off.

AFAIK, it already is closed-source and always has been. The code belongs to NCSoft, not to SCORE. Thus, SCORE is not capable of providing true, legally-open-source access to the complete code base. What they might be able to do, however, would be to provide an open-source collection of patches which, when applied, would implement all of SCORE's changes, since those patches would be entirely SCORE's own work. (OTOH, they might not be able to do this, depending on whether the patches are considered to legally be a "derivative work" or not.) If this is possible, you would then obtain the base server code elsewhere (by some unspecified means) and apply the SCORE patches to get a SCORE-equivalent version of the code.

I have to admit I agree my fellow soloist, Eldriyth. But even with out exp bonuses I am out levelling content. Would you maybe look at going the other way around. Ie. +25 Inf bonus for -25% exp, then +50% inf for -50%exp. I don't see dropping exp more then that for the pay off. A thought for you masters of the universe to ponder. According to one of the load screen tips, there's an XP bonus for being in a large group. Removing that bonus could be the simplest option for evening out solo vs. group leveling. And I tend to agree with your concerns about outleveling content. While I love to see my character gain a level as much as the next person, I do sometimes wonder whether it would be better to slow down the rate of level gain. (But, then, I generally think that while in a large team, which goes right back to the team XP bonus...)

I don't see where Zolgar is assuming that all (or even most) 50s were powerleveled there, only that some are. His point, as I read it, is that RPing a character for 100 hours should provide the same name protection as that enjoyed by a character that was PLed to 50 in 10 hours, even if the 100-hours-of-RP character is still at a very low level. This doesn't presume that all 50s were PLed and, in fact, it would grant permanent name protection to some slow-road 50s prior to their reaching the level cap, since it could take them over 100 hours to get there. I am mildly curious about how you think that Zolgar would get his RP characters up to 100 hours played if he didn't "set aside 1 hour a month to log in [his] characters" (indeed, it would have to be more than one hour a month, unless he was taking over 8 years to hit the 100-hour mark) or if he "never log[ged] into" those characters.

First, "this aspect of the game is more interesting to me, thus I prefer to focus my play time on it" is not "deciding to limit yourself", it's playing the way you find the most fun. This is equally true regardless of whether the aspect you focus on is RP, power leveling, base building, doing radio missions, following story arcs, costume contests, dancing under the statue in AP, or whatever else. It still applies when the thing you enjoy isn't a thing that causes you to go up in level, or even if the thing you enjoy actively prevents leveling. (I turned off XP gain for a while on one of my characters because they were getting some cool story arcs I hadn't seen previously and I wanted to be sure that I could finish the arcs and any followup arcs before outleveling them. This wasn't "limiting myself", it was ensuring that the limits built into the game wouldn't hinder my enjoyment of it.) Second, SCORE has chosen to implement a name reuse scheme which uses character level as the measure of a player's investment in a character. It's entirely possible that they didn't even consider that there may be other ways to measure investment, such as Zolgar's suggestion of time played. Suggesting that the policy could be amended to take this other measure of investment into account seems quite reasonable to me.

I can confirm having a similar problem. I think the current code may be taking the "one power activation" rule and considering toggleoff to be a "power activation". In detail, I have a warshade with a macro for reverting to human form that's something like "/macro humn powexec_toggleoff Dark Nova$$goto_tray 1" (I don't have the game up, so I can't verify that it's exactly correct, but I know it does work in-game, so kindly ignore any errors in my memory of it). Last night, it occurred to me that, after reverting to human form, I always immediately turn on Shadow Cloak, so I right-clicked the macro in my tray and edited it to "powexec_toggleoff Dark Nova$$powexec_toggleon Shadow Cloak$$goto_tray 1". This, however, does not work correctly. If I am in nova form, it only turns off Dark Nova and does not activate Shadow Cloak. If I am already in human form, it turns on Shadow Cloak. (The tray switch works in both cases.) Thus, I can see that each of the power state change commands works individually, but the game is not allowing them to both be combined within a single macro. Or, there is also one other possible explanation which comes to mind: Timing. It may just be trying to execute the macro too quickly and I'm not done changing to human form (and, thus, my human-form powers aren't available yet) by the time it tries to turn on Shadow Cloak.

I suppose I'll raise another voice in support of the naming policy. It seems quite fair to me. Even without doing DFB, I regularly get new alts up to level 5 within an hour or two, and then the policy only requires logging them in once a quarter to keep the name locked. So far, I've got (only?) about two dozen characters on Homecoming. Even with a full-time job, I haven't seen the character select screen report a single one of them as having been idle for more than 4 days, so touching even ten times that number of characters at least once every 90 days would be quite easily doable if they were all characters that I had any interest at all in playing. The policy is not anywhere near the "you must play only one character straight through to 50" that some in this thread have claimed. Also note that, elsewhere on this forum, there has been another thread within the last week (sadly, I forgot the title, else I would provide it) specifically on the topic of allowing non-unique names, via a Champions Online-style "character@global" system. While changing to that has strong proponents in that thread (as in this one), my impression is that the substantial majority of posters in that thread were in favor of keeping things as they are and continuing to require all names to be unique. I would prefer to see SCORE spend any development time elsewhere, rather than on overhauling character name management solely to please a noisy minority by inflicting a new, ugly-as-sin naming scheme on us. I don't know about you, but I've grown up with Spider Man comics, not Spider Man@Stan Lee comics. And that's the way I'd prefer to see City remain. (And, yes, I know that serious comics fans will debate how Spidey has been handled differently by different writers/artists and so on, but that's beside the point. The comic has not, to my knowledge, ever been sold with "Spider Man@[author name]" as the main title splashed across the cover, and I am dead certain that no character within the comic has ever referred to him as such.)