Andreah

I would love to just click on a chair and then my character just sits on it.

I've been buying uncommon salvage in bulk well below 20K all last year and continuing today. That's hasn't been a real floor. Things are selling faster, but I am noticing more competition in certain markets, along with modest rises in the low-ranges of price swings, which is perhaps more people trying to get overnight or several-day deals..

I have been struggling to get this across, and you have hit it right on target. The most tanky controller may not be able to tank as well as the best tanker, but certainly better that the lowest level tanker, and least kitted out tanker, or the worst-played tankers. On any given team, that controller might be doing the tanker role masterfully -- and on the next team, they may not be tanking at all. Not only is it build and player dependent, it's also situational and can't be assigned correctly in advance from the AT alone. I still maintain that building a diverse team is already well rewarded, and does not need this artificial system tacked on top. If we need more Prismatics in the economy, just give them out for other good reasons, not this bad reason.

I understand the feeling. But I don't believe we can say a team is interesting just on the basis of the AT's that show up in it, except in a couple of peculiar instances that this system would miss. Even if I went in to all the rest of this, I'd get to a hard stop on this part. I would want to at least see a proposed algorithm that would track how players on the team actually used their characters and tried to asses the role or roles they're playing. Are you taking the alpha strike? Are you taking aggro off others? Are you buffing friends, or debuffing enemies? Are you getting mezz effects on enemies? Are you moving spawns around? Are you using your damaging powers? In melee, or ranged? There are too many ways to doing interesting things that don't resolve by AT alone. I wouldn't even care if these were effective, were they even attempted? This would say a whole lot more about the "role diversity" of the team than this checklist by AT.

Are you using the 2xp experience bonus from P2W? If so, you are not getting Influence drops from mobs in missions, only the other loots -- regular enhancements and invention salvage & recipes. Be sure to spend your reward merits well; as others have indicated, they're not worth spending to directly buy normal invention recipes, or even ATO's and normal purples. Always ask yourself, can I get this cheaper from the market if merits are worth 200K each? The answer is usually "Yes, a lot cheaper." Finally, there's some good information on how to use converters to make rare/unique IO's for yourself or to sell at a profit. It's easy. Here's a thread on one specific kind of sellable you can easily make. And here is a YT video on the same topic, starting from absolutely nothing.

We'll hurry and advertise it as much as possible until then!

If you would like to see a detailed report of what drops from them, check this out:

So you agree it wasn't worth the first comment? Let's have productive discussion instead of telling the other side it doesn't bother them when clearly it does.

How about, since you could only get one per day, you won't miss it when it's not implemented.

I'm going to take more issue with the idea that your role in a group can be evaluated merely from your AT, rather than from how you actually build and play your character. Unless the game is going to track and evaluate your actions on the team while the content is played, this is ridiculous. A lot of people have referred to the "roles" called out in character creation. Honest to god, those should be removed too. Even there has to be such a thing, I'd put a x/10 score for each AT for how easily it can be built to perform each role. And even that is a gross disservice to how the game actually works.

As has been said several times, playing without the bonus will be seen as playing with a penalty; that's just human nature.

It take a lot from another player to get me to be judgmental -- I've been on the receiving end of those, myself. And it can go both ways -- if a team leader is being too picky over your playstyle to the point you're not having fun, well, add a note and move on. It doesn't mean they're a bad person -- it just means you don't enjoy playing with them.

That's fair. But it doesn't change that the proposed system is still entirely based on archetypes. I'll make an edit.

I would prefer a high-accuracy attack to an auto-hit. Give people a reason to time using a large insp or casting a strong short lived defense buff, or let them rationalize there's at least a chance of it missing even if they stay close.

I would not want to see anything like "dailies" being added. However, if there were an activity that I feel should be rewarded, it's having the star. Give the leader a Prismatic for completing a mission, any mission, anyone's mission, with a full team of eight., if it's the first time they've done so in a day. But even that, meh, I would prefer not to try to lead people by the nose to do things they would not otherwise do. I feel like two candidate problems are attempting to be addressed with this one system: Teams aren't diverse enough by Role as determined by Archetype Not enough Prismatics are being awarded I believe (1) is just plain false, is not a problem, and trying to address it in any way is distortive of play. And, well, (2) could be addressed easily in many other ways, quite a few of which have been touched upon in this discussion already. This game already rewards technical and tactical diversity, from powers, slotting, archetypes, and roles inherently. It needs not have an artificial and overly simplistic system tacked on top. This will only distort play in ways I see as being entirely negative. It does not matter to me that it would be easy to fulfill, or that to us wealthy veterans the reward is small, it's still a negative with no upsides. The idea that the prismatic reward is the upside is a distraction -- more prismatics could easily be rewarded for other non-distortive reasons, or even just at random. There is no reason they need to be coupled to this system at all.

Well, I don't mind how anyone else plays their character (so long as they're not using Dimension Shift). That being said, [Taunt] will apply a 100% -Range debuff, and pull in snipers/marksmen/etc -- just hitting them with any old ranged attack won't. [Taunt] is a potent tactical tool; if a player would only be using it to "taunt" the enemies they're already hitting, I don't know what to say about that. On topic, I don't see a lot of soloists doing this much. Occasionally, but it's not common in my experience. If the main team's buffs were keeping them going, then leaving to go off and do things will be a lesson in itself that I don't need to harp on. But if someone is obviously playing in a way that's making the content more difficult for the rest of the team, I might say something to them. And if they don't listen, there's always "One star" and the "Kick button".

Exactly.

I think the system should be removed; that's my first choice. However, failing that, how about the Yahtzee! method: A) Any five unique AT's on the team B) Any five of the same AT on the team Then, superteams and near-superteams would get a perk, too. I'll offer more possible options: C) Qualify if the leader of the Team is in the level band of the TF. D) Qualify if there's a team member who started on the TF at the lowest level allowed to join it.

It's still not difficult to become fabulously wealthy in a few minutes a day. It just takes some know-how and organization -- which you can learn here on the forums easily.

They annoyance factor is, imo, the main reason most people avoid the other enemy faction in, say Pi radios teams. A bump in Council difficulty will be welcomed, but not change the fundamental nature of the experience. The main annoyances of the other groups are, imo, insubstantiality, blindness, and ... *cave maps*.

My concern is that role has rarely been clearly delineated merely from AT, and no AT only based system can capture CoH's real diversity of roles. The classic roles aren't the only roles, and that deep complexity of how we have learned to build characters to perform roles in surprising and wonderful ways in CoH is short-changed, badly, by this system Worst, the system as described is going to incentivize people to limit their team make-ups and can only cause people to be refused into teams merely for this artificial reward bonus -- AND this is something we have been telling new players this game does not do! And for new players, the value of a aether is not some small bonus add-on -- it's a big reward. They're going to be excluded from teams because the team needs someone else to fill this artificial requirement. The harm to the community outweighs any individual benefits from bonus rewards. If the real problem is not enough Aethers being out there, then just give everyone a bonus Aether at level up from level 2 to 49. It is my opinion this change violates the spirit of the game, and should be dropped in entirety.

Look at all the servers that aren't bumping into the concurrency cap! Iirc, you get five transfers per week, and it would be a good idea to have a character or two on the lower population severs which also get larger experience buffs. Great people on those too, and no trouble finding teams either with them peaking over 500 each whenever Excelsior is in a queue.

I agree. For example, My Kin/Fire defender is certainly support. But is also tanking (softcapped with complementary dr and mezz protection), does ranged damage (defender secondary buffed with fulcrum shift), Also control via fold space and [Repel] with KB->KD. We can build with so much variability it would be easier to list what archetypes generally can't do rather that which these traditional roles they would narrowly fit. Even with any five different ATs, this excludes clearly variable superteams, like all defenders, all tankers etc. I'm not convinced this change is actually solving a real problem, and I'd be happy if it was deleted.

Or.. send me 100,000; and receive no thank-you back!

I've been pointing new players here often. :D But not everyone wants such a jumpstart, and that's all good too.