Blackbird71

You set your standard for what you thought the article should be, and then judged it according to that standard, rather than what it actually is. You demanded that it be a critical analysis of the patch, and that it be informative of the contents of the patch. It never once claimed to be any such thing. It is an opinion piece on the overall direction of balance in the game, as indicated by the article title. You attempted to present yourself as some sort of expert or authority in a position to "grade" his work, and labeled it a "critical analysis" of the patch which it never claimed to be. That characterization is not valid, and it is misrepresentation of the contents and intent of the article which perpetuates the deception started by this incorrect thread title. You contradict yourself with these two statements. You literally declared that the article needed to include a "comprehensive breakdown of the patch notes." If that is not expecting "detailed," then what is it? It only "fell short" of your expectation for some imaginary article that you wanted to read, not for the purpose of the article as advertised and written and what it was actually intended to be. This is like criticizing a cat for not being a dog. It's as if a sports reporter wrote a general piece on the current state of teams in a basketball league, and you're criticizing him for not giving you a play-by-play description of what happened in a single game last week. The article isn't what you wanted it to be, but the author never claimed that's what he was writing.

The only place it is labeled as a "preview" is in the tags, after it is labeled as an "opinion" in the same manner. Hinging your whole critique that "it should have been a detailed review" on that tag, while simultaneously criticizing it for actually being what one of the other tags labels it as, is still disingenuous and a misrepresentation. Yes, it's an opinion piece. It clearly labels itself as an opinion piece. It doesn't represent itself as being anything other than an opinion piece. So why are you demanding it be a "a comprehensive breakdown of the patch notes"? Your expectations are unrealistic and not founded in anything presented as part of the article.

People keep criticizing the article by saying it failed as a review of the patch contents. I must have missed where it was ever billed as such a review. From what I've seen, it is only the title of this forum thread that labels it as such; the actual article title is "Into the Super-Verse: What the heck is going on with balancing in City of Heroes Homecoming?" There is no implicit or explicit mention there of being a patch review. Yes, it's an opinion piece, and one which expresses concerned opinions shared by many HC players (do not misconstrue "many" as "all" or necessarily even "most"; I'm not speaking for the whole player base, just citing observation). Regardless, critiquing an article for not being something that it never claimed to be is disingenuous and a bit of a strawman.

I agree with the general sentiments of the article: This puts into words the experience I've been having with just about every patch over the past few years - the "fun [has been] slowly seeping out with each balance pass." Without any other clear direction, it seems that the pursuit of balance IS the primary impetus for the changes of each patch. The problem with this philosophy is that "balance" in MMO games (especially ones with such a diverse range of character combinations and possibilities) is a myth. It is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, a mirage pursued with no real end, and no real prize to be achieved - all it amounts to is wasted effort chasing something that can never be had, and the loss of anything of actual and true value that could have been had in its place. I've stayed with HC because it's where the community is and where my friends are. However, the changes with each pass increasingly make me want to actually play the game less and less, not necessarily because of any specific change (though some have truly negatively affected my experience), but because the overall impact has been to make the game less enjoyable. My recommendation would be to establish and clearly communicate a direction and intent for HC beyond "balance for balance's sake," and to focus on changes that actually make the gameplay mechanics "fun" over the homogenization that comes with just trying to make all the numbers match up. Yes, I realize there is a great degree of subjectivity to the term "fun," and it will vary greatly depending on the individual, but even if the fun you focus on is not "my fun," having that as a goal over just "balance" would be an improvement over the current state of things.

As expected, there has been some discussion within my SG regarding this patch. Generally, opinions have been mixed - there are features that some like that others don't, and vice versa. However the one opinion that seems to be common among all who have weighed in is that they do not like the Freaklok as a group in general. I don't want to put words in their mouths regarding the reasons, so I'll just say that personally I dislike both the flavor of the "mash-up" as well as the mechanics of the group. When they were limited to the new "elite" missions, they could be ignored. However, populating a zone with them only assures that I'll be avoiding Khalisti Wharf once this goes live. I'm sure others will disagree and I'll get hate for this opinion, but HC asked for feedback so I figured all points of view should be shared.

"Balance" is a red herring in a multi-class (AT) MMO. It's the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, something pushed towards but impossible to reach. So much gets destroyed and so much gets lost in the name of "balance." The only way to truly balance such games is to homogenize all the classes. If an MMO developer ever tells you that they made a change "for balance," they are either deceiving you or themselves.

It doesn't work that way for me. I have so many alts to choose from, that I'm never short of someone with Patrol XP. Adding more Patrol XP to one character I'm playing means that I'm not switching to a different character that already has accumulated max Patrol XP, so it's not using up that banked XP and therefore is in fact a net loss. Contrast this with the XP granted immediately on exploration, which does not add to the time needed to play a character in order to use the Patrol XP, and therefore does not take away from time that could be spent using the Patrol XP on another alt. You're more then welcome to like and appreciate this change, but it is not an "outright buff" in every case and condition.

When you juggle several alts so that they are frequently topped off on Patrol XP, it's a net loss.

100% this. These badges (and the original bonus that led to them) would be a lot less controversial and confusing if they just followed the existing playstyle categorizations. Instead, they present new players with information directly contradicting the information they were presented with on character creation, and which in several cases is just wrong or incomplete (e.g. Control Widows).

I understand your points, though I don't necessarily agree with your conclusion. That aside, I wanted to address a potential issue with this proposed language. When I read those two descriptions, it would make me think that the "classic City of Heroes experience" is what was officially created when the game was live, which would then imply that Praetoria was something unofficial created by others after the game shut down. It may be a minor bit of confusion, but it could possibly work against your goal in that people might be more likely to opt for what they think is the "real" version of the game as intended. This. Please. So much! Stop sending all of my Primal characters to FW/NW contacts, when there are plenty of legitimate Primal contacts out there! If I could, I would make sure that Twinshot lost my number and could never automatically contact any of my characters again when they hit level 5. She and her arc are just so annoying. Plus, it always pops up while I'm in the middle of either Hashaby's arc or the City Hall contacts' arcs, and to pursue Twinshot I'd have to abandon those and likely outlevel them and be unable to return to the arc in progress. Graves I can tolerate a bit more easily, but something about Twinshot and her cohorts just rubs me the wrong way.

Your previous statements indicated that even if you already had "classic" settings on your characters, new characters on the account would have the new "default."

Old players make new characters. If you're going to go through with making these new settings the default, then it would be nice if the "classic" settings could be chosen as default account-wide so that you don't have to remember to change it with each new character made.

This is going to mess with all kinds of shortcuts that have already been set. And making it work differently for old characters vs. new is going to create complications. I think it would be better to keep the way it has been for 20+ years as the default, and then make the new settings a selectable option, rather than vice versa.

The option is appreciated, however I'm not a fan of "hidden settings," as it's too easy to forget they exist or how to use them.

No thank you; this would make no sense. Matthew Hashaby specifically continues the story after the fall of Galaxy City. If you don't take the Galaxy City tutorial, there is no reason to route to him. By contrast, the old City Hall contacts still present some solid missions, and it would be a shame to have those forgotten and disregarded just because the Outbreak tutorial doesn't send anyone there anymore.