PoptartsNinja

Much as I hate the Incarnate Blasts, I do think they're pretty well balanced against each other (with the exception of Cryo and Vorpal (Void is good!), but cones are always going to be a hard sell). Pyro's the fastest so it's a good fight initiator and the easiest to get solid results out of, mighty and void have great utility, and Ion is slow but guaranteed to do the most damage if used well. The trick to Ion is: it isn't a snipe and it isn't a fight initiator. Because it's single target, it has a good chance of only alerting its initial target until the damage component goes off, so if you toss it out from max range there's a good chance that target will have charged out of range of his friends before ion hits it. Instead of using it like pyro, Ion is more of a mid-range attack. You'll get much better use of it in any (or all) of the following ways: - Fire it at just the very edge of the mob's vision range, where they're likely to turn, walk a step, and then pull out their pistol or any other ranged attack option before they charge for melee - Fire it against a target on the far edge of the spawn you want to engage (rather than the closest target) - Fire it after aggroing the spawn through another means like a ranged aoe, a hold, or via just a good old-fashioned body check. Because if the whole spawn is together, through whatever means you choose, you're going to devastate them.

Even if they couldn't be combined, I think the dual inspirations would be more useful (for the ATs that find them attractive) if they replaced the standard inspiration drops rather than being in addition to them. So if you would've gotten an orange or a purple, you got an orange/purple dual; if you would've gotten a yellow or a red you get a ketchup/mustard dual, etc. Being in addition to the standard makes them compete for space, which makes it harder to get 3 to convert; so I always keep duals turned off. They're quite literally in the way.

Oh, that makes perfect sense to me. Except it should be psychic damage, to represent the sympathetic pain the mobs feel for the poor Regen user. It should also cause them to do the cringe animation every so often. Yes, that is a joke.

I could've sworn the -4s still did. There's a cutoff where mobs still give appreciable (if small) amounts of experience, and that cutoff has always been -3 or -4 to +4 or +5. I'm sorry, it's been so long since I've thought about any of this that forget the exact cutoffs. There's a hard limit on mob xp to keep anyone from sidekicking (back before it was team-wide level adjustment) vs. +7 mobs and earning millions of bonus XP. Likewise, mobs below a certain level are considered too weak to be a challenge--but the OG devs also didn't want to punish people for finishing off a mission they'd outleveled as long as they were only a level or two ahead of it.

Doesn't matter. Even if there are no bosses in the spawn, a boss of that level would attack you so the minions do too.

They agro because bosses of that level would agro. At -3 minion is gray, but a -3 boss would be blue; likewise a -4 boss would be green.

Maybe just a 'closest defeat to completion' that only shows progress on the defeat X badges?

I could see that working with the rocky crumble aura in place of the usual dark particle effects.

One of City of Heroes' greatest problems was splitting its playerbase. Splitting the playerbase was genuinely harmful and hastened the death of the game. Unfortunately, the OG devs did it all the time: first with Atlas Park and Galaxy City, then with CoV, then with Praetoria. When something had to give after Praetoria and they needed to start concentrating players to avoid the "nobody plays this game!" new player death spiral, they chose to get rid of Galaxy City. I'd love to see Galaxy City return--but not as a newbie zone. If it gets resurrected (with or without a facelift), I'd love to see it brought back as a new mid-level zone--perhaps as a precursor to Faultline; or a follow-up after it, with some streamlined content with a minimum of "go to another zone and" missions similar to Overbrook and Faultline's setup. I know the current dev team is mostly focused on high-level content to give the 50s more to do, and the odds of the city's lower-level content getting an overhaul is pretty slim--but the midlevel content could really use some streamlining. I can think of at least one contact in Founders' Falls, for example, who sends players to no missions withinin Founders Falls itself--and I know that's not a rarity. We could use a mid-high level zone that is a bit more... contained.

It also punishes creators who use the AE to make hard story content for their SG to run through, like I do. A lot of the final bosses in my AE arcs already generate no XP because they've got edited powersets so that I can sneak in a fun surprise or two like a super strength baddy with a blaster nuke, or Liquify, or whatever else I think might shake up the experience in a way my friends will find fun.

To elaborate further: not having access to the acolades they'd already unlocked made side switching even less desirable back when swapping sides required 32 missions and multiple days of effort. IIRC you could only change alignment once a week back then? But I might be misremembering. Removing access to the redside acolades would make people even less likely to do redside content. The barrier to people playing redside is population, not a lack of things to do. CoH had a real problem with splitting its playerbase and making itself feel less populated than it actually was, which is a problem that still impacts the game.

The colors of the front loincloth of the Sybil set are reversed. The interior is the exterior and vice-versa.

Your character name: Ba'al at Your Global handle: @Thunderchild Your base’s name: Irkalla The shard it is located on: Everlasting The passcode for entry: IRKALLA-26134 The category your base is entering under: Fantasy / Arcane Contributing builders’ names or Global handles @Thunderchild Any additional information you wish the judges to know beforehand: Please use Visscale 3+

That isn't how I read (and continue to read) GMGM's post, so I feel the question still needs to be asked.

Honest question: If you don't want to see multiple people rehashing the same bit of criticism in dev threads, do you recommend users giving likes and/or thumbs ups to criticism they especially agree with and want to support; or giving thumbs downs to criticism they don't want to support as a way of showing devs that we do/don't think something is a genuine problem? If so, that instruction may need to be included in feedback threads going forward. Because people have a natural tendency to "yes, and" things they feel are a problem.