Jump to content
Hotmail and Outlook are blocking most of our emails at the moment. Please use an alternative provider when registering if possible until the issue is resolved.

Andreah

Members
  • Posts

    1705
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by Andreah

  1. How about a second kind of weekly drawn from possible Oro arcs? The Weekly Ouroboros Target; one each from Red and Blue. Double merits and a one-time special reward.
  2. I've never been so alone as I've been on an MMO team where players don't chat and might as well be npcs with occasionally better AI. I prefer non-speed content. And yet I like being efficient, to an extent. I like seeing a group work together, and become stronger as a whole than all the pieces. I even feel some pride in that. It's even better when we mix in some chatter -- and be people to each other. Share in the joy of the efficient, powerful team we've made. We're awesome! And each of you seven teammates have made me a happy player! Thank you so much! On top of that, I'm a roleplayer, and if we add casual in-character banter, it's even better. Or if I'm with people I've had in-character interactions with before, we hang this mission into more subtle, large scale stories. At the end of the discussion, I don't care how long the mission takes if we're taking time to be social on whatever level works for everyone. But the tag "speed" on a LFG request ... no, that's not my thing, even if it's great for others. To me it's a hint that not only won't there be time for being friendly and helpful to each other, and for casual or roleplay banter, but those will counter to the main goal and be unwelcome to some degree. And somehow, these teams that work together often end up being pretty darn fast and efficient. It's almost as if people who're having fun, and care about each other play a little better.
  3. I like this idea. Call it a Vanguard Targeting Unit, and borrow an existing model for it. Have it target the highest remaining health Rikti enemy within range, and stay on that target so long as it's alive and still within range. That should keep it from swapping targets constantly. It could cost a fair number of Vanguard Merits, and still be useful. The HVAS costs 250, and unlike that, this would not damage enemies or generate much aggro. Perhaps 100 Vanguard merits for one would be fair.
  4. I'll consider doing that when this thread has run its course. My suggestion would solve most of the inconvenience problem from the inf cap, and not present new risks inherent in changing the size of a variable that ranges widely through the code, client, and databases. Also I think the Homecoming / Score teams have added new kinds of salvage before, so it should not be too terribly unfamiliar or difficult. I can't be sure there of course. For drawbacks, I don't see any really. People who don't want to think about Inf in these quantities won't ever see these unless they decide they want to. None of the UI fields in the client would need to be made wider to accommodate larger numbers, prices of every day things would not change -- this isn't about making people richer, but making it easier to handle the large amounts of inf wealth some people have and many supergroups accumulate. That last point has been missed, so far. There are a number of supergroups that hold events, contests, and such with prizes and giveaways. They manage multiple billions of influence to prepare for and run these, and since it can't readily be kept in one place, it's a significant QoL issue. Finally, I don't want to understate the drag on the system from the extra alts made to store inf, happenstance sitting on names (I have many that do nothing but store inf I could delete tomorrow), taking up database space, and so on. Email is also not a very good solution to storing inf. The email system itself was not designed for long term "kiting" of influence to ourselves. Perhaps even the shear number of steadily increasing emails containing inf with similar titles and addresses is causing issues within that system we don't even see. I know it occasionally fails even now -- periods will go where I cannot claim things from mail and I get error messages from it. And storing inf on market bids is scary level dangerous.
  5. Superpacks have a decent return on investment, but there's a LOT OF CLICKING if you do it "at scale". Edit: It pays to think in advance about how you're going to do what in what order on which alts, if you buy, say, 100 or 1000 superpacks and plan to open and sell their contents. You start to think about what settings and macros might help, and where to put windows to minimize mouse travel distance.
  6. I concur with this. And this is why I like the notoriety system, and would be fine with it being tweaked or extended to offer a greater range of difficulty. That might mean the effective softcap in some content is higher, but no one would be forced to run that content at that difficulty if they didn't want to.
  7. Thematically, I like that singularity will have this dual effect to draw things in and then throw them out (or knock them down). And that it can fling objects out of nothing at enemies.
  8. I can see it being a good change, I was relaying that I heard somewhere there was a good reason why it wasn't easy to do , but instead more game-breaking-really-hard.
  9. Apparently this will almost certainly not ever happen, because too many non-mobs have mag thresholds jus above where it (and fold space, and teleport target) are right now.
  10. Imagine if you could designate the singularity to fling mobs AT THE TANKER! 😮
  11. I skip T9's with crashes. I hate them so. The only exception is Rage, and I hate it too, but that's another powerset. On my Inv character, I just keep large or super insps when I need short term extra survivability.
  12. For some players, the knockback feels "super", even if it lowers overall group kill efficiency, and they want to do it anyway.
  13. Regarding Singularity messing with tankers (and others) concentrating mobs together, well, it already does. But if its KB is converted to KD, and if it could be commanded to follow a specific player closely, maybe that would do it? Perhaps more a change that can be done at this point, but if a singularity followed the tanker closely, drew more mobs in, and knocked them down, I couldn't see that as anything but a win all around.
  14. I would ask the person to try to control their pet more carefully. And sometimes they can and sometimes they can't, it'll work out.
  15. Sorry I'm late to this. There is a way around this, right now, which is not widely known. It's expensive and limited, but very useful for certain situations. Keep a few Ultimate inspirations around. They can shift your combat level up by one for three minutes, and while shifted from 50+1 to 50+2 in regular content, you can teleport +4 bosses and even EB's. If you email an Ultimate to yourself, you can claim it from your email even while inside a mission so long as you have one insp slot open in your tray.
  16. It's not one thing, but many things. I'll give an example. If you want to buy more than, say, 200 superpacks at once, you need more than 2 Billion inf. Right now, it's kind of squirrely to stage that much inf at hand to do this. For my case, I would send it to my global in 1 Billion chunks from the alts I keep it stored on. It's an annoyance, and the various places where these data, email, market bids, alts, and so forth, are kept are potential points of failure and burden. As I noted in my alternate idea post above, I think there are other ideas which would get us most of the benefit at possibly lower effort and risk.
  17. I could see something like this being done. Maybe with alternative animations that would be suitable for any character theme.
  18. Let me offer a serious alternative. Keep the 2-Billion inf limit on each character. Much as I'd love to change this, it could create wide ranging unforeseen bugs. Instead, add a new piece of special salvage, which is purchased at the merit Kiosk for inf at 1 Billion each, and which can be sold for 1 Billion Inf at the same Kiosk. These would be transferable only to characters on the same account. Or maybe even allow them to be traded/emailed to anyone -- that's how normal Inf works, after all. Each character could keep as many as 9,999 of these at one time. If this were done, we would no longer need to store inf on pages of special purpose characters, or float it in emails to ourselves, or in clever auction house bids.
  19. I could see a completely new body model requiring significant data edits to all the costume pieces. If that's the case, like Davy said above, this is a colossal scale effort. But if there were a simple way to get 90% of that, sounds cool.
  20. I like it when content has us think a little, now and then. But not too much, or for many of us, it turns into work. Or especially if the tactical problem becomes so nuanced it requires voice-comms coordination to get it right. I love you all, but I do not want your voices coming out of my computer; not now, not ever.
  21. There are a lot of problems with CoH's system. But it works. That alone does encourage the HC developers to be very deliberate, cautious, and minimalist with changes to the core mechanics. Now, we're free to make suggestions and speculate on how they might affect gameplay. But keep a reasonable perspective about it. When I suggest something, I won't suffer terrible disappointment when it's not in i29. And on the other hand, if someone makes a suggestion I think is terrible, it's not a threat to my ability to play the game, for the same reason -- it's not about to suddenly show up in the next build, or even the one after. A suggestion I've made before, and will probably make again, is to adjust the critter attacking players to-hit table in the original purple patch. This would change the effective softcap, in some high-difficulty content. Don't think for a moment that this wouldn't be a huge change, even if it turned out to be as simple on the development end as changing three numbers in a data table. They know some changes have huge repercussions. Nothing like that would goin without a lot of internal debate, and the further public debate with us. It might have good sides, but it would also have bad sides. So, suggest, speculate, discuss, advocate, all that. But also let's remember to be excellent to each other along the way.
  22. I agree it would be cool if we could join, say, up to five supergroups on a single character, and then pick from them for the one I wish to represent my character as being in at any given time. It might also be cool to implement some sort of global channel variation, that is belonged to by characters and not globals, and is limited to a single server. Maybe allow Supergroups to invite non-member characters to their chat channels. All this sounds very messy and unlikely, software- and effort-wise. But we can dream. 🙂
  23. Options are the way to go, if we go anywhere at all. 🙂
  24. The assertion that powerleveling would be a thing at such high difficulties is a hard one to sustain. Even now, it's not uncommon for teams to drop difficulty to +3, or even +2, sometimes, to improve xp and inf gain rates. This is also something that's hard to convince people of now and then. Harder isn't always better, from a powerleveling or inf-gain perspective. Consider XP/Hour running radio missions. XP gained is the XP per kill, times kills per hour, plus mission rewards per hour. If you're doing content that's too easy, then even though you kill things fast, they don't give much per kill. And you can only do so many missions per hour, since it takes time to pick them, travel between them, and breeze through the insides. At the harder end, if the team is struggling, that's many fewer kills per hour, and fewer mission rewards per hour. Possibly with a lot of debt being accumulated from repeat deaths. So, for any given team, there's a sweet spot where they are killing fast and getting good rewards per kill. This is why council radios are so popular; not because they give more XP per kill, but because we can kill more of them per hour at any given XP/kill. If we put in more difficulty levels, some teams might run at +5, +6, or even +7, but they are going to slow down. And they'll figure out that unless they're all already top-tier incarnates, they get less XP per hour. And if you are all already top-tier incarnates, who exactly are you powerleveling? And let's think about inf gain. I think, much, if not most of it, already comes from special purpose farms, not people doing normal content.
  25. A level 50 +1 running normal content at Notoriety level +10 will be fighting combat level 60 bosses when they are themselves at combat level 51. That's +9 on the purple patch tables. I don't care how good your build is fighting +4 council, they'll destroy you. The softcap there will be 75%, they'll have a 1.5x accuracy multiplier, and you'll have an effective -56 to-hit. A team might swing it, but not if they're dragging lots of lowbies around to powerlevel. It only gets moderately better as you drop down to +6 or +7. They're going to be very hard to hit, hard to affect, and will hit us back a lot more often. People sidekicked at 49 or non-level shifted 50 will be in some truly horrible pain fighting at +10 or worse.
×
×
  • Create New...