Jump to content

Replacement

Members
  • Content Count

    936
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

636 Excellent
  1. People can post whatever they want, BB (within the forum guidelines, of course). And I am allowed to respond with the reminder that... And that my feeling is this truth undermines any argument that "devs shouldn't be working on this."
  2. "Censorship" - implication of authoritarianism. Instill fear. "Spend no time" - whatabout'ing the issue by implication of there being better things to work on. "Who knows how things could break" - More of the same. Fear+the issue with investing time into this. This is just right out the gate. I'm not saying you're doing this intentionally, that you're at all nefarious. But you are trying to push a narrative. Through insinuation, you have indicated you think people should be allowed to message stuff like this in-game, that you want to push the envelope on allowed-names. Hell, you even said your advice for someone throwing around the N-Word would be "if it upsets you just take a break." It's telling to me that you didn't even think about reporting the person. Your whole attitude is "if people don't like it, they can leave." The truth is: a chat filter like this would likely run at the client level and would at worst, result in the same thing as completely removing a channel. Is it really censorship if I'm not pushing the filter on you? It's either feasible, or it would grind the servers to a halt and it's not. Either way, I wouldn't be arguing that it's not even worth looking into. As I find myself saying in tons of Suggestions & Feedback threads: What they prioritize to work on is for Homecoming to decide; not you. All we do here is make the suggestion.
  3. @Jimmy it's Saturday, wanna kick open a can of worms? You guys really need to get a Patreon solution running so you can know how much money is accessible for server upgrades. I think Patreon allows finite numbers of each donation tier so you could probably cap even the lowest level to cap growth.
  4. Assaults are cool, but we really need more Control sets.
  5. Example of the "mirror" problem: I think Psychic Lash would be an ideal Epic. It's hard to flesh out full power sets with only 3 animations, but 3 whips + 2 misc psychic powers would be splendid. I would like it to be available to Blasters, but I don't think it's wise to further incentivize "Petless Masterminds" by giving them access as well. I think it'd be nice to let Controllers get in on the fun but I feel like if Dominators had it, it would lessen our likelihood of seeing an infernal/hellfire assault. Of course, the easy answer here is to say "It is what it is, and what it is is very easy to port to stalker/scrapper," but melee gets all the fun. In summary: whips for everyone.
  6. Would you pare them down to a more simplistic set of rules, then? Example: "Don't give melee ATs more than 1 decent AoE in any new sets" seems like a pretty straightforward design principle. But I don't see the harm in giving, say, Stalkers a set that's mostly utility powers like Smoke Grenade and Surveillance + an 8 minute recharge aoe hold.
  7. If new Epic sets were made, how many old design schemes would we adhere to? There are a few prongs of this; I'm open to any commentary that broadly fits that category. Let me give you my example first: AT "Mirrors" - For example, Corruptors and Defenders share the same pools. Do we... really care about this, if we were to make new ones? There are already some minor breaks. One example is MM and Blasters sharing pools, but blasters all lose a patron power for a pet. Stalker/Brute versions of Body Mastery lose the (IMO, awful) Conserve Power for a passive +5% max endurance. Would we care if new divisions were built? Example, "This new Epic is available to all Blast-primary ATs." Another would be, I have in my mind some ideas for a "Command" Epic that I imagine going to Tanker and Scrapper, countered by an "Undermine" pool for Stalkers and Brutes. Other example patterns (not rules, to my knowledge): Strict power selections - the tendancy to follow a pattern, such as Controller Ancillaries tending to give 1 ST ranged, 1 AoE ranged, an armor, and a recovery. Body/Energy Masteries on the melees tend to already disrupt these patterns. Would more disruptions be welcome? Or would we prefer that when Scrappers finally get a Psionic option, that it fits the pattern of expectations? Power scale rules - there's a broad rule (err design pattern?) of double recharge for Epics. I'm actually a fan of this and don't think it should be broken, but including it here because it's a valid part of my topic worthy of anyone's commentary. Specific AT "bleed" - this is basically an extension of "strict power selections" -- you can sort of see which ATs are allowed to bleed where. Tankers and Brutes get a lot of powers from Controllers; Scrappers and Stalkers get a lot of Blast sets, usually with a debuff from a Support set. Would you prefer to see these upheld? or would you like, e.g. a "Defender-lite" option for everyone? These questions are obviously open to the community, which I hope generates some feedback for the folks running the show but of course, I'd also love to know how Jimmy, CP, et al feel about the Epic Future. Also, I vote new epics requiring a Praetorian quest, open to all alignments and factions.
  8. +1. This gets old fast and turns into things you stop logging into a character for. I'm not really going to be "for" things that require casual players to edit game files just to enjoy their characters.
  9. You could start by explaining it. I feel like your definition of "conventional leveling" is leveling at a very specific pace and it's our fault for enjoying any of the QoL additions developers may have added since i0. If the developers doubled the merit rewards of story arcs and more people played them, would that "not count" as conventional leveling?
  10. I will always be against the opinions that come out in threads like this that boil down to "AE farms are fine being 50x as efficient as story arcs, but don't you dare try to close the gap by increasing rewards of said arcs." Usually paired with an insinuation of moral high ground because you failed to recognize "the story is its own reward." But we're not about to make progress in these lanes so I'm going to suggest something a little more community-positive. The biggest buffs you could make to the game's story arcs: Increase ability to join in on your teammates' arcs (a way to gain their contact, and ideally even join mid-arc for lessened rewards). Increase level band of contact availability. Ideally, the minimum levels should be lowered by 1 and maximums increased by 5. That would significantly help when trying to run story arcs with friends when one of you is 27 and the other is 24 and the amount of time it takes to get you both inside the level band is also the amount of time you both have until it's time to put the kids to bed.
  11. Not to beat my own dead horse, but this is why I would love to see a reallocation of resources (remove Beta server, maybe even condense one of our 5 shards) to create a "League" shard where we run a 3-month shard with new stuff on it. It would be a great way to stress-test new changes, but also a release valve for some of the crazier changes. I think we would find a great deal of players becoming eager to see some of the wilder changes rolled into the main shards, and at least they had their time in the sun with the real screwball ideas. (and then we would set it back to a standard Beta shard between League cycles)
  12. In a vacuum. I would like to point out GB is, in this very thread, pushing for mez buffs.
  13. Definitely hoping Utility Belt is next but I'm eager for Gadgetry as well. I have a lot of toons who will see respecs when these sets come out. Vote 1 for Utility Belt. Speaking of Utility Belt - random thing. I keep seeing mention of people talking about a "long knockdown" from Bolas. I don't get where people see this. The description from the wiki is "You hurl a pair of bolas at your target entangling them and rendering them immobilized. For the duration of the effect the target may become knocked down." Which reads to me more like "everyone has a global proc against this immobilized target to trigger a knockdown." Shoring up focused travel powers? I've been coming around to this notion that the buy-in to a particular pool is itself a benefit for any given pool power. The fact that Super Jump shares a pool with Combat Jumping is a benefit over Mighty Leap, for example. This advantage gets amplified any time the "requires 2+ powers" picks are actually... good. So! My list of improvements is mostly improvements to the buy-in of the rest of the pool those travel powers belong to. In short, improve the appeal of the original travel powers by making it worth being one of your four pool choices. Acrobatics needs something additional. Don't even care what. We've talked Teleport to death but one thing I've never seen suggested: A way for the user to teleport to target ally. Reverse-Recall Friend. This would greatly increase the utility of the rest of the set if I could TP to my Superspeeding friend and then recall the rest of my party to us. Flight is a good pool. I honestly like everything just the way it is. Even Afterburner. I made some suggestions re: Whirlwind recently that I think would be wonderful for helping Super Speed compete with Speed of Sound. I am still a proponent of making Phase Shift into a travel power. Remove the duration cap (replace with bigger dings to Endurance if it's really necessary), and give the user a move speed and jump height bonus -- NOT jump speed, or at least not much. The goal is to make it feel floaty, like you're out of... phase with the planet. I'm also no longer convinced that all travel powers need to come online at the same level 4. We will eventually have 8 options for level 4 travel powers and many people just Ninja Run until their 20s anyway. So no, I don't think the reqs would need to change for this Phase Shift suggestion.
  14. Ok, so the part that wasn't clear to me was that you think unenhanced aoe damage is where it needs to be. Or to put it another way, you think aoe's scaling is radically stronger than ST, and I think I see what you mean... Since aoe damage multiplies with targets hit, it will naturally gain exponential scaling as you become able to take on larger and larger groups. Ok, i feel like I'm coming at this from a different frame of mind than you, but I can find some a lot of logic here.
×
×
  • Create New...