ShardWarrior
-
Posts
2480 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by ShardWarrior
-
-
Just now, Astralock said:
- You actually have to play the game to get said mission.
- There’s more inherent risk involved as the mission could be accidentally completed, especially if you invite Joe Schmoe along.
- Greater exposure to the game world outside of Atlas Park and Pocket D for those invited along.
- There’s also more risk in that the mobs are not crafted by players.
To address each bullet point -
- Not really. You would have to do a couple of missions or get invited to a team where someone else has it. You just need to talk to the first Police contact to get radio missions.
- Not really. S/L defense capped builds are at no more risk in a Council PI portal or Council radio mission than they are in a S/L AE farm.
- A new player getting invited to a portal PI farm sees part of one more zone. Not really a "greater exposure".
- Not really. See S/L defense capped example above.
-
Just now, Marbing said:
Still, solves the problem they are seeing. Remember we are talking about Reward Merits, not XP 1-50. AE will still be the best for that, they are moving reward merits out. That is all. Thus, not everything will be all in one place.
Whether people are farming in AE or a Portal mission, the result is the same. Farmers running across multiple accounts can and still would earn inf faster than your average player and can buy merits with excess inf if they wanted to.
-
1 minute ago, Marbing said:
The goal is to eliminate all rewards (that aren’t cosmetic) from being in one easy place in the game. I doubt the devs care so much which mission or missions you do outside of AE to fill the gap this will create. They just don’t want this to turn into AE of Heroes.
Once again, removing AE entirely does not solve this problem. All it does is replace "AE of Heroes" with "Portal Farm of Heroes" or "Radio Mission Farm of Heroes". Farmers who spend all their time farming are not going to start doing TF content with others.
3 minutes ago, Marbing said:Good! I’d encourage that actually! 🙂
If that means moving out of AE back to the old portal missions, honestly what is the difference?
-
1 minute ago, Bionic_Flea said:
There are all sorts of things that they could do short of shutting off the game. This patch has just shown us a few. I am confident that not everyone will like all the things they could do to curb certain undesired behaviors.
Just being honest, I do not see any of what is being done here forcing people out of AE to run more "normal/right" content. People who enjoy farming are still going to farm or continue to solo. Were XP and inf to be removed from AE or AE removed entirely, those same people would just go back to farming the old missions. They are going to find the next most efficient way to farm influence and/or XP.
3 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:If the trend is that players are spending the majority of their time in AE and that trend continues to grow, at what point do we just have one giant AE and forget about all these empty zones?
Most players spending their time in AE is definitely not the case from what I can see. I play almost every day and see requests in LFG for all kinds of non-AE content. All weekend long I saw plenty of advertisements for TFs and story arcs advertised on Excelsior. I formed a few SBB runs and TFs myself and had no problem filling. We had two teams on a league running Synapse on Saturday. I cannot speak to other servers, however what I see on Excelsior and Torchbearer does not line up with what is being said regarding the majority of players just staying in AE.
-
10 minutes ago, Krimson said:
You need 46 Empyrean Merits to get an Incarnate to Tier 4. That is 276 Empyrean Merits total, or just under what you will eventually get at Vet Level 48. Cut this in half, and by Vet level 99, you will have 210 Empyrean Merits which will be enough to get FOUR Tier 4 Incarnates and a bit of change.
Thus cutting Empyrean Merit rewards in half would completely eliminate the ability to complete Incarnates by just running regular content. Then if you want to complete Incarnates, you will have to do iTrials, TFs, or DA content and you have no choice.
Fair enough. Just seems to me that the goal is to get more people to do "normal/right" content as the general complaint from the "normal/right" content crowd is too many people are spending too much time in AE.
Personally, I do not see having to run a few iTrials or DA arcs here and there to be that big of a deal, however I freely admit everyone is different. As I said, I never said this was a perfect idea.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:
The "problem" that I think they are trying to solve is that more and more players are doing nothing but AE and that some players are doing AE AFK 24/7 on multiple accounts and reaping tremendous rewards in Inf, Emp Merits, and (since Emp merits are convertible) reward merits.
There is not much they can do to prevent that short of shutting the game off. AFK farmers running 24/7 across multiple accounts are going to earn way more inf than the average player regardless of playing in AE or not.
13 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:If you can get everything you need in AE and faster than anywhere else, why do anything else?
This is subjective to the individual. It all depends on what rewards they are after. You can farm special enhancements and reward merits fairly quickly by speed running TFs. Only speaking for myself here, but I farm only when I am short on inf or want to boost alts a few levels. Most of the time I will run non-AE content. It gets boring farming all the time.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:
Please, no. They are set up nicely now to quickly get to +3 level shifts, then T3 to all, with T4 possible with only vet levels by 99. Changing the drops would change that nice progression.
Would be faster to run back to back iTrials to get everything you need to get to T4 I think. The problem seems to be EMP merits from Vet levels being "too good" in relation to "normal/right" play and buffing the EMP merit drops from iTrials does not seem to be on the table, so was trying to think of a compromise. I never said it was a perfect idea. 😁
-
1
-
-
Thinking about this a bit more, would it be possible to reduce the number of EMP merits granted by the Vet levels by half? So instead of like 10 per 3 Vet levels or whatever make it 5. Still provides the nice bonus with "normal/right play" content being the better source for them.
-
12 minutes ago, Marbing said:
Okay bud, you disagree with me. I disagree with you. It is what it is, life goes on.
Absolutely nothing wrong with disagreement. It is a normal, healthy thing to see all sides of an issue.
-
1
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, Marbing said:
This new policy doesn’t change that.
In a way, it does. It is trying to actively bully people into playing alts for reasons that are specious at best. It also assumes that anyone who has low level alts that are not leveled up to 50 are just name hording.
15 minutes ago, Marbing said:Why? Did they pay for it? This is just a “neener neener I got it first” mentality.
You did not pay for a name either. This is just the mentality of the entitled whiner who feels they have more right to something than the next person because they want it.
16 minutes ago, Marbing said:This will happen under the new policy.
Yes as it should. This is where the policy should be used - on accounts (not characters) that have not been logged into for 2 years or more. I understand that it would be more work to program this to go by account instead of character. It is more work, but a better solution overall. The ideal solution is to fix the code so that names global handles can be combined with character name, then this becomes a non-issue.
17 minutes ago, Marbing said:Bottom line, there currently exists a loop hole that would allow players to camp a theoretically infinite number of names just to be a troll. The devs are trying to limit that in some way. Whether or not it’s actually happening is irrelevant and if you think it isn’t to some extent then you are the willfully ignorant one.
There is no problem to fix from what I can see. I am very skeptical of the need for this. If any real data can be presented that anything less than a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of active accounts are using up all character slots on all shard across multiple accounts, by all means please share it. I will believe it when I see it. Trying to claim that anyone is going to use up every word combination of every available language by creating multiple accounts is also just plain stupid. Do you have any idea how many words there are in the English language alone and how many combinations they can be made into? How many accounts will need to be made before that happens?
From what we can see here in the numerous threads available on these forums, there are people releasing names and sharing ideas for open names they have found. There has been an example of one player in particular being labelled a "name hoarder" who has already said that when contacted, they would release a name. I have not seen any data or evidence at all of these mythical hordes of accounts with all character slots on all shards used up just to troll people. All we have been told is there are over two million characters, many of which have not been logged into for a year or more. That tells us very little regarding names and how many of those are from inactive/abandoned accounts. For all anyone knows, the majority of the names being held up there are gibberish words or numbers that no one would even be looking for.
If this policy is intended to help prevent name squatting, it does not work as the next person to get a freed up name can potentially sit on it just as the first person did. The net result is the same.
22 minutes ago, Marbing said:But again, you didn’t pay for these names, this game is FREE. If there were a subscription fee and limited character slots you would have a better argument. Without that, the arguments against it are just hollow.
Yes, the game is free. You did not pay for any names either, therefore you are no more entitled to them than the person who already has them. Nor does this game have the number of active players to even make this remotely an issue that needs addressing. If you can provide real data about how many active accounts have all character slots on all shards used up and what percent of those active accounts are of the total number of active accounts, by all means share it. Without real data, your arguments are just hollow.
-
2
-
4
-
-
8 hours ago, Marbing said:
Haven’t seen any yet. Minus leave of absence stuff, but that’s an edge case.
Then that is on you. You have not read the entire thread, are being obtuse, contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, willfully ignorant or some combination thereof. Active players can be contacted by other players to negotiate the release of a name. If they do not want to release it, they should not be forced to do so. Inactive accounts that have not logged in for more than 2 years should get freed up.
-
1
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Marbing said:
Nope. There absolutely is solid reasoning for it, and this argument has been countered many times in this thread. You just don’t like it, which is fine.
I couldn’t care less if a name is taken, I use a different language often. I just don’t get the backlash for this policy. This is a no brainer IMO.
There is and has been solid reasoning provided in this thread why it is redundant and completely unnecessary for active accounts, you just do not like it, which is fine. I cannot speak for anyone other than myself, I find the sense of entitlement some have appalling quite frankly. Getting this upset over someone else getting a name you wanted before you and causing you so much grief is just baffling. Just use something else. It just is not that hard. It is also truly amazing the arrogance several people have in wanting to dictate to others what an acceptable amount of play is.
-
4
-
4
-
-
11 minutes ago, Troo said:
oh man the zing machine is finely tuned today.
so concise too.
I thumbed this down just because I could and I know it would entertain you. I hope you enjoyed it. 😁
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Marbing said:
This can still happen even with this policy, so moot point.
The policy itself applying to active accounts is what is moot and redundant. There is no reason for it if an active player can be contacted by another active player.
1 hour ago, Marbing said:Again, if you lose a name on a toon you haven’t played in over a year on an 18 year old game that you didn’t pay for, oh well. Use a thesaurus.
I see. Using a thesaurus is perfectly fine and only applies when it is the other guy. The person looking to use an already taken name should not have to. That makes perfect sense. 🙄
-
1 hour ago, Troo said:
thumbs down are much harder to get than I thought.
Have one on me! 😉 Enjoy! 😁
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, UltraAlt said:
This is stalking. There is enough of that already going on with names.
People are finding the globals of people with names that they want, bombarding them with tells asking them to relinquish the name, and then complain if the person doesn't respond to them.
We don't need this.
Any player harassing another player over a name can and should be reported to the GMs so they can be dealt with accordingly.
-
4
-
-
7 minutes ago, Yomo Kimyata said:
So I *strongly* recommend against ever making decisions based on a (shudder) poll.
Making decisions in a vacuum is not always the best solution either. There is a happy medium somewhere.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Not a bad idea at all. I would also like to see an increase to the ignore list size as part of this.
-
13 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:
Gets even worse when changes happen that you off-handedly asked for thus proving the devs listen to everybody. Cuz we know devs hate all scrappers.
Not all of them, just Regen scrappers. 😉
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Bionic_Flea said:
And I 100% agree with the last part. I would like to know precisely what the problem to be solved is to know if this is a good solution.
Agreed although I seriously doubt that the community at large will ever be brought in on the discussion on future issues.
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Number Six said:
There's not a rule against it and I'm not convinced there should be a rule against it, but the game's rewards structure should not be set up in a way that encourages it.
I have to agree. If you are all categorizing whatever this is as abusive behavior, a rule change is in order. From the sound of things, you can detect it and can deal with anyone doing it accordingly. The sledgehammer approach that affects everyone seems a bit much here, although I realize at this point it is too late to make any changes.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Sanguinesun said:
Simply put: ego.
That and intolerance.
-
1
-
-
May she rest in peace. She was truly an inspiration to generations of people. Condolences to her loved ones on their loss.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Faultline said:
The short version is that content devs don't want AE to be the best source of every reward out there, so either the vet rewards go, or the conversion from emps goes. The former has incarnate progression nerfed out of AE as a side effect, the latter has reward merits from a few non-AE sources nerfed as a side effect (most were set to drop merits simultaneously to compensate).
Thank you. At least this is something. I will respectfully disagree that AE is the best source of every reward in the game.
AE Vet Levels -or- Empyrean to Reward Merits
in Suggestions & Feedback
Posted
Only speaking for myself here, but the rewards for things like Synapse, Citadel and Dr. Q could be quadrupled and I still would rather do something else. Boring and tedious is boring and tedious, regardless of the reward.