GM Sijin

FWIW I, too, miss the feeling of an lively city with players moving about more visibly. But I also find the gameplay objectively more enjoyable than it was 'back in the day'. The challenge here is: How do you encourage players to move about the world in a way that doesn't force tedium for the sake of tedium? (An MMO specialty, admittedly.) Zone events is arguably the biggest way currently, though has plenty of flaws and are rather temporary.

City of Heroes was rated T(een), aka PG-13. The mechanic would need to be limited to higher level enemies, as going from 2 Lts with at least one low health to a full health boss at mid-lower levels (meaning sub 30-35) is a bit of a rough ask. It should be something pretty rare, otherwise it looses its Cool Factor. Plus it would make my pre-pet soloing controllers cry.

Let's get back and stay on topic. That's less of a suggestion and more of a "suggestion". I'll start: The option to purchase it plays an important role: Removing currency from the economy. One might be inclined to assume that people would go out of their way to earn it without the option to buy it, but in practice this is absolutely not true for everyone. I'd wager the majority that buy a larger number of these on their accounts would be the least likely to actually go out of their way to earn it on all those characters. For this reason alone this is very unlikely to change. Considering the portal cannot be purchased, I'll assume what you mean by this is that the option to earn the power via the exploration badge should be removed. I'm not sure how this would achieve the goal you're looking for, as it would primarily make Ouroboros less populated unless the method of earning it was both level agnostic (at least from 14-50) and borderline trivially easy. In which case this would actually likely result in less player interaction, since people often ask others to help them by opening a portal so they can get it. The rest of the suggestions seem to be geared entirely on making the city seem more alive. Given that you aren't likely to interact with any of the players that would be in these locations in any capacity, would not NPCs serve the same role? Perhaps that is a direction the suggestion could go that would be far less unpopular and ultimately less damaging to the Homecoming community population. (The genie is out of the bottle, putting it back in would be highly controversial and absolutely would cause some people to quit the game/move to other severs.)

... my first Praetorian on live was a demon summoned long before Hamidon ran amok, and who fit into Praetorian society quite nicely until the resistance brought an irresistible chance to 'quietly' cause mischief. But to more sincerely answer the question, with the society of Praetoria, socially aberrant behavior is just less common in general.

Uh, defeated you mean? 😉

In order for us to easiest handle this type of request please submit a support request in-game on the character that is the leader for the SG. You can do this with the petition command (IE: /petition Rename SG) - make sure to fill out all fields of the form and include the new name you would like in the ticket. Because we require the leader of the SG to be the one making the request, this is the easiest way for the team to validate that and does not require you to be online when a GM works the request. Thanks!

We do not ban people for being heated. We issue warnings, which are temporary marks. Someone has to either cross a line one should not cross, or be pretty belligerent across multiple threads or for an extended period of time before they're going to get banned in this way. As I said, I agree that threads that are created calling for nerfs without providing anything objective to suggest it's warranted, or respectfully calling to gather that information, should probably get moderated. I certainly don't want to see a plethora of NERF ALL THE THINGS threads. Is your concern that we're already at an unacceptable point, or more that we're (at risk of) moving in that direction?

Trolling is defined by intent, not effect. Dismissing an idea as an attempt to troll is a fallacy whether you're correct or not. Whether you're correct or not is often impossible to actually prove. Best to stick to arguing the merits of the idea than the intentions of the person. As for the topic at hand, and let me be very clear here: I speak for myself, not the team at large. I agree that topics that cover reducing the effectiveness of anything are going to be more divisive than those that talk about boosting the effectiveness. That's just the nature of our society. I agree that topics that are blatant calls to nerf something without providing any objective and verifiable reasons for doing so should be frowned upon, and if such reason refused to be provided, moderated if they persist. It is the burden of the person trying to enact change to prove that change is warranted, and if they aren't willing to put in the time and effort to gather enough data for at least a strong starting point it's going to be difficult to make any progress. I disagree that we should issue a blanket ban on discussing whether something is overperforming. This is an important part of game design, especially when there's a PvP aspect to consider. We should expect a high bar for the basis of these discussions. Those bringing the topic up should realize the burden of proof is on them and that that proof must be fairly exhaustively provided and in a manner that can be verified and that both applies to the game in a general sense, and that takes into consideration all levels of play not just a single facet. Solutions should be refrained from being posted before a problem is actually proven. This high expectation goes both ways and if those with the burden of proof are working on gathering information it should be expected that any dissent will be done with the same level of attention to details. By all means, call out what is missing from the data, what considerations haven't been taken. But don't use those gaps as 'proof' that there isn't an issue if you aren't willing to provide the same level of data, especially when what is being provided at least suggests there may be reason for further research. There has been some discussion around 'balancing points' or where the game should be balanced. This has merit in many places, where what to balance around is definitely something that should be established first and foremost. But where there is a balancing point is powerset performance within an AT, attack sets in particular. It isn't a perfect system, but the relative performance within that metric should be considered. There is a median, and there will be those that are above and below that median. It's not difficult to imagineer an acceptable range for that median, and those that fall above or below that should be looked at. That data has to be gathered first, though. A far better solution, although one that is above and beyond far more difficult, is educating the community as to what makes for a good discussion, and what does not. You certainly don't need to get offended at someone's idea to nerf something. You absolutely don't need to attack someone for bringing up an idea that you disagree with. Fallacies should be avoided. Respect should be a given. Seek clarification rather than making assumptions. Avoid hyperbole and exaggeration when trying to make a point. Et cetera. Even divisive topics can be discussed with civility, if people allow for it. It's a choice to react with hostility.

Zodai covered things pretty well! I'll add two to this. A common thing I see, and this isn't limited to new roleplayers by any means, is players blurring the lines between IC and OOC. This can manifest in a lot of different ways, but probably one of the most common is the assumption that because a character acts a specific way towards your character that the player of that character feels that way towards you personally. Or where a player is actually doing that: (not) liking a particular player so their character behaves differently than they probably would have otherwise. Obviously it's impossible for most people to keep them completely separated, but where most of the problems come from is assuming that a character's actions reflect the player's thoughts. They might, but it's much better to assume they don't than assume they do and just react as your character would in that situation and try to not take anything personally. The second one is using unspecific identifiers like 'you' in emotes. When the scene involves literally two people, this is less of a problem but is still a bad habit to get into. If you're in a group of people, it can get confusing. It's best to be specific when taking actions, especially when there's more than just two people around. IE: Jane Doe shakes your hand. vs Jane Doe shakes Johnny's hand. or Jane Doe shakes the offered hand. The first will read to everyone in range as though Jane's shaking their hand. The second is extremely specific, assuming there's only one Johnny around. The third is more vague, but unless multiple people are offering a hand to shake, it's still pretty obvious who the emote is aimed at, or at least who it isn't aimed at. In many situations people will be able to determine who 'you' is supposed to be aimed at, but not all. Best to just avoid it.

Some still use Virtueverse but I believe the site doesn't currently allow image uploads, which they may be working on fixing. In the meantime they're allowing for off-site image links.

Just FYI: This is a known issue that is apparently very difficult to fix. I believe there are 2 or 3 known costume pieces affected. These are gender specific errors, so what won't work on male may work on female and huge which may be why your friend was able to get the costume pieces to work. That combo on male shouldn't work for anyone in character creation to my understanding.

Most likely culprit is you haven't created your game account(s), which you can do here: https://forums.homecomingservers.com/gameaccount/

Main problem with this is that non-human skeletons don't have dance animations. Other than that, yes.

You should get them if you have at least your alpha slot unlocked, I believe.

I'd say keep the existing set of options for those who prefer setting them that way, and add a new option under notoriety for popping up such a window.

Just to clarify, were the character(s) impacted level 50, and did they have the alpha slot unlocked?

Day Job accolades powers require you to first get the accolade, then spend time logged out in one of the day job locations for that accolade to earn either charges or duration for their power/effect. Once you have the Time Lord's accolade, logging out in either Ouroboros or Cimerora should earn you time for the Time Lord's Boon auto power. Unless you mean you've logged out in those locations after getting the accolade and aren't getting the day job power for it?

I doubt 10K is the max range the engine can handle on the simple reasoning that you can enhance it with range boosts just fine. If the max range was taking range enhancements into account... well, there's probably options still.

Same process, just make sure you're using the right manifest and close and re-open or Re-Validate (it's called something else for Island Rum IIRC) to make sure it patches. If that doesn't work, triple check your manifest is pointing to the correct one: http://patch.savecoh.com/manifest.xml

This is exactly how the base teleporter power works, actually. Though maybe you were disqualifying it based on its activation time, recharge and/or cost.

Not likely. This option has always worked this way, and so has never worked. My guess is something they changed with ui scaling is interfering with that option.

Good news! These are two things the devs have said they'd like to keep if at all possible (or something reasonably resembling them), which is part of why the command hasn't already been disabled.

I'd say that's actually all the easy part, given its already in there. The hard part is that because this intercepts other powers, or more specifically when they FAIL to activate and has additional checks based on the power you're activating, it almost definitely would require completely new tech in the powers system.

Oh yeah. I forgot to report this on the forums. So both those options take the hex code equivalent in decimal via setoption. The issue is it's RGBT and the hex value of that caps out the variable (32 bit limitation) at about 7FFFFFFF, meaning anything that uses more than half the red channel is not going to work. IE: If you wanted FF0101FF you'd have to enter the value (sans commas) 4,278,256,127 which is well above the limit of 2,147,483,647. This could potentially be easiest fixed by making it store as an unsigned integer or a 64 bit integer with an accepted value of 0 to 4294967295.

The way walk is designed it actually breaks if it doesn't suppress other powers, because anything with +run speed (like, say, swift) makes you move faster than walking speed.