Homecoming Server Update (May 20th): What's Next?

[Burnt Toast]

Maybe stop assuming that people who are 50 powerleveled their way there - its' insulting (and frankly shows bias) and does nothing for your stance. The naming policy is absolutely fair. If you are not playing or at a minimum logging into a character it should be freed up. Seriously - if you are THAT concerned set aside 1 hoour a month to log in to your characters. Your desire to hoard names that you never log into shouldn't limit people when it comes to naming.

 

they can't make rules based on how a person decides to limit themselve.

 

Sure they can, if a significant amount of people play that way, that portion of the population deserves recognition.

 

I have just as much right to be attached to the name of a character who is only level 6, but I have spent over 100 hours roleplaying, as you do a 50+ fully IO'd character you played for 10 hours and then decided to shelf for some other project build.

 

Note, I do not say I have MORE right to the name. I said I have just as much right to be attached to the name, and I should not be forced to powerlevel the character to 50 to get the name locked in, any more than you should be forced to spend 100 hours playing a character to get the name locked in.

 

This is why my suggestion was to add a second check. Is the character x level? If yes, pass. If no, has the character spent y hours logged in? If yes, pass. If no, the name is released.

 

It benefits a subset of the community, offering them the same protection without forcing them to change their play style to get said protection.

[Lunchmoney]

Your naming policy as it stands will CRUSH casual gamers, and casual gamers make up the most of the gamer population out there.

I'm a casual gamer, I get to play maybe once or twice a week. Everyone in my SuperGroup is in the same position. It certainly wont CRUSH us. Please dont think to speak for a group that you dont represent.

 

 

[Stan The Man]

Sorry to make this post here but I thought people might want to know that there is already an exploit to avoid having to login with each character on their server one at a time.

 

I am in the process of making my old characters and have reserved their names to dud characters with every intention to switch them to non-dud characters.  It's a simple little trick.  Create a character, reserve the name, login and logout.  Then spend my time meticulously designing the character properly with a faux name.  Switch the names by adding or subtracting a number at the end and boom.  Done!

 

Apologies if this upsets anyone for how I reserve names but even some of the names are a bit on the uppercase I replacing a lowercase L or vice versa. 

 

To the point:

 

So if you change the character names, the server counts this as having logged in.  Likewise changing the name from Superman to Superman1 now identifies as having logged in in zero days.  Simply change the name back to Superman and you're done.  There is a chance you might lose the name in the seconds you switch it but that is pretty astronomical.  The planets would have to align or something. 

 

Or karma was really out to get you that half a minute you changed your character's name.

 

Anyways, you guys might want to figure out a better way for the system to flag us being logged in than just simply going by how we change our names.  In the meanwhile, hope this helps anyone who has over 50 characters.  Good grief! 

[nDervish]

Let me rephrase that.

 

they didn't make rules based on how a person decides to limit themselves.

 

First, "this aspect of the game is more interesting to me, thus I prefer to focus my play time on it" is not "deciding to limit yourself", it's playing the way you find the most fun.  This is equally true regardless of whether the aspect you focus on is RP, power leveling, base building, doing radio missions, following story arcs, costume contests, dancing under the statue in AP, or whatever else.  It still applies when the thing you enjoy isn't a thing that causes you to go up in level, or even if the thing you enjoy actively prevents leveling.  (I turned off XP gain for a while on one of my characters because they were getting some cool story arcs I hadn't seen previously and I wanted to be sure that I could finish the arcs and any followup arcs before outleveling them.  This wasn't "limiting myself", it was ensuring that the limits built into the game wouldn't hinder my enjoyment of it.)

 

Second, SCORE has chosen to implement a name reuse scheme which uses character level as the measure of a player's investment in a character.  It's entirely possible that they didn't even consider that there may be other ways to measure investment, such as Zolgar's suggestion of time played.  Suggesting that the policy could be amended to take this other measure of investment into account seems quite reasonable to me.

[nDervish]

Maybe stop assuming that people who are 50 powerleveled their way there - its' insulting (and frankly shows bias) and does nothing for your stance.

 

I don't see where Zolgar is assuming that all (or even most) 50s were powerleveled there, only that some are.  His point, as I read it, is that RPing a character for 100 hours should provide the same name protection as that enjoyed by a character that was PLed to 50 in 10 hours, even if the 100-hours-of-RP character is still at a very low level.  This doesn't presume that all 50s were PLed and, in fact, it would grant permanent name protection to some slow-road 50s prior to their reaching the level cap, since it could take them over 100 hours to get there.

 

Seriously - if you are THAT concerned set aside 1 hoour a month to log in to your characters. Your desire to hoard names that you never log into shouldn't limit people when it comes to naming.

 

I am mildly curious about how you think that Zolgar would get his RP characters up to 100 hours played if he didn't "set aside 1 hour a month to log in [his] characters" (indeed, it would have to be more than one hour a month, unless he was taking over 8 years to hit the 100-hour mark) or if he "never log[ged] into" those characters.

[Zolgar]

Maybe stop assuming that people who are 50 powerleveled their way there - its' insulting (and frankly shows bias) and does nothing for your stance. The naming policy is absolutely fair. If you are not playing or at a minimum logging into a character it should be freed up. Seriously - if you are THAT concerned set aside 1 hoour a month to log in to your characters. Your desire to hoard names that you never log into shouldn't limit people when it comes to naming.

 

Maybe stop assuming everyone who is remotely opposed to this change is a name hoarder.

 

For MY part, this new policy will basically not effect me. At present I have all of .. 6 characters, most of whom are already past the 20 mark so are safe for a year, and even then most of my characters have names that I could probably let lapse without losing them, anyways.

 

I am someone who plays the game many different ways. I farm, I power level, I slow roll, I roleplay, I badge hunt, I may even get back in to base building... so I see this policy from the perspective of all of these things, which is why I posed the adjustment of making it level OR hours played, it offers the same protections to multiple play styles as opposed to making someone feel they need to change their play style to ensure they don't lose their name.

 

I completely agree there needs to be a name release policy, because great names going unused because of hoarders or inactive players kinda sucks. I just think the name release policy shouldn't almost exclusively favor people who play fast.

[Burnt Toast]

Then Zolgar has nothing to worry about does he..since he plays his characters and logs them in...

In two posts he compares a powerleveled 50 getting their name permanently to someone who isn't level 6.. Maybe instead just say a level 50 character since truly it is not that hard to get to 50 in less than 50 hours without ever PLing. My first 50 had 56 hours when they dinged 50...never saw an AE or any other type of farm. I do all kinds of things when I am logged in... socialize, farm, base edit, TFs, radio missions. I also have quite a few alts - not in the 100+ area but 50ish and I have NO problem logging them in once a month. If you can't be bothered to take the ONE MINUTE it takes to log in your character with a name that is so precious to you - that says a lot.

 

I swear people will complain about anything. You have the game back. You don't have to pay one penny to play. The game isn't about hoarding names it is about actually PLAYING the game whether that be street sweeping, radio missions, PUGs, TFs, roleplaying, powerleveling, etc... the point is you actually PLAY or at a frickin minimum log in to show that you care about that character for one minute a month.

 

You keep talking about characters that have hundreds of hours played - those characters are not in jeopardy of anything since they are being played. What some people are complaining about are their 100+ alts/names they have created that they haven't bothered to log in to for days..weeks..a month... THAT is what this policy is about. It is not about punishing low level Roleplayers because... if you are roleplaying - you are logging in! This policy is very similar to what was on CoH Live and what a lot of MMOs do to cut down on name hoarders or people who sell names.

 

The time people have spent arguing how unfair this is on the boards they could have spent logging into their alts...just saying. Lord knows if I were that concerned... that's what I would do. I'm sorry you don't like the rule - there are a lot of rules I don't like too, but I am able to see them from every perspective in a mature unselfish way. I personally think AE should be at 100% rewards, BUT I understand that it is a huge server resources hog...so it doesn't bother me. I understand there is a influence limit placed on rare salvage - that will cost me hundreds of millions in influence, but I also understand it isn't about me, but the community as a whole. I think the multi-boxing rule is too strict, but again... I understand it is for the betterment of the community as a whole. Maybe...just maybe.. stop trying to see this issue as being about you and/or your friends... and see it as an issue that affects everyone in the community. I mean isn't that what everyone claims is so great about City of Heroes... the community... because frankly what I am seeing here from some people who oppose the name change kind of spits in the face of that reputation.

 

 

 

 

Maybe stop assuming that people who are 50 powerleveled their way there - its' insulting (and frankly shows bias) and does nothing for your stance.

 

I don't see where Zolgar is assuming that all (or even most) 50s were powerleveled there, only that some are.  His point, as I read it, is that RPing a character for 100 hours should provide the same name protection as that enjoyed by a character that was PLed to 50 in 10 hours, even if the 100-hours-of-RP character is still at a very low level.  This doesn't presume that all 50s were PLed and, in fact, it would grant permanent name protection to some slow-road 50s prior to their reaching the level cap, since it could take them over 100 hours to get there.

 

Seriously - if you are THAT concerned set aside 1 hoour a month to log in to your characters. Your desire to hoard names that you never log into shouldn't limit people when it comes to naming.

 

I am mildly curious about how you think that Zolgar would get his RP characters up to 100 hours played if he didn't "set aside 1 hour a month to log in [his] characters" (indeed, it would have to be more than one hour a month, unless he was taking over 8 years to hit the 100-hour mark) or if he "never log[ged] into" those characters.

[Burnt Toast]

The definition of the word "hoard" as I used it has no bearing on number but rather on the storage of things unused. I don't care if you have 2 or 200 names - if you can't be bothered to log them in then you are hoarding them and making it so those names cannot be used by someone else. One of the more vocal people in this thread spoke of their 100+ alts which is why I on occasion have used that number. To me...hoarding...is keeping something that is not being used regardless of the actual number.

 

Your "hours online" proposal makes no sense and won't help those people who are the most vocal in this thread as they simply make a character and never play it again...so they have the name. Your suggestion makes no sense to me because if a character is logging in and accumulating 20-40-60-100 hours... they are logging in and will not be affected by this policy. (I say that in a non-confrontational way because I don't see how a character being played for 40 hours is in danger...because they're not).

 

I actually have an unpopular opinion regarding this... I think a level 50 should not be immune... I think they should get 1-2 years max and then their name is freed up. Same concept - if it is that important to you... log it in.

 

 

Maybe stop assuming that people who are 50 powerleveled their way there - its' insulting (and frankly shows bias) and does nothing for your stance. The naming policy is absolutely fair. If you are not playing or at a minimum logging into a character it should be freed up. Seriously - if you are THAT concerned set aside 1 hoour a month to log in to your characters. Your desire to hoard names that you never log into shouldn't limit people when it comes to naming.

 

Maybe stop assuming everyone who is remotely opposed to this change is a name hoarder.

 

For MY part, this new policy will basically not effect me. At present I have all of .. 6 characters, most of whom are already past the 20 mark so are safe for a year, and even then most of my characters have names that I could probably let lapse without losing them, anyways.

 

I am someone who plays the game many different ways. I farm, I power level, I slow roll, I roleplay, I badge hunt, I may even get back in to base building... so I see this policy from the perspective of all of these things, which is why I posed the adjustment of making it level OR hours played, it offers the same protections to multiple play styles as opposed to making someone feel they need to change their play style to ensure they don't lose their name.

 

I completely agree there needs to be a name release policy, because great names going unused because of hoarders or inactive players kinda sucks. I just think the name release policy shouldn't almost exclusively favor people who play fast.

[Ssieth]

It does rather sound like everyone is arguing this point from a perspective of this new policy being some cast-in-stone notion that will never change.  I read it more as a first pass, utilising very simple and easily available metrics to try and limit a behaviour that most recognise as generally harmful to the community.  That doesn't seem like a terrible thing.

 

Could it be refined?  Yes - Zolgar's suggestion is a good step in that direction.  I believe I also read a suggestion of some mechanism to hold things down for those people who know they are going to be unable to access the game for a while.  Sorry not to credit you but also an excellent idea.

 

What we have to face, though, is with each improvement added (and I'm sure there are more than the two above) - there is an added burden on those people coding up the back end.  I have a great deal of trust in them wanting to improve things and in their capability to do so but we have to recognize that their time is not a bottomless well that we can draw upon.  In that light, I really like the idea of a quick-and-simple fix now (as proposed in the original policy) along with something more nuanced and complex later on.  The advantage is that those later enhancements to the policy can be conceived of with experience of the limitations of a more simplistic and immediate one.

 

In the short term, it is unlikely that many people will be inconvenienced to any significant degree (no one in the first 30 days) and even for those who would have character names at risk after those first 30 days, they are at risk and not necessarily immediate threat of loss unless there just happens to be someone lined up and desperate to grab that name right now.  That seems statistically unlikely, to say the least.  Worst case scenario?  You have to change a name on a character.  That might be a bit of a pain but it's hardly the world falling in.

 

I know it can be frustrating to not be able to use the name you want.  The name I used way back in the day for my main was taken by the time I got to Homecoming and it was a bit of a blow.  However, it's not the end of the world, no matter how it comes about. 

 

At the end of the day:

• Will this policy cause a positive outcome for a significant number of players by freeing up names locked out by abandoned characters?  Probably.
  
• Will this policy cause a negative outcome for a significant number of players who are totally not using placeholders to hoard names?  Probably not.
  
• Can the policy be improved upon with more work by the dev team?  Almost certainly
  
• Is the policy set in stone for all time?  What I have read suggests not
  

 

What the above suggests is that the policy is probably a good first step (and almost certainly not a final one) in balancing the community's needs regarding character names.  It's not going to meet everyone's needs but, on balance, there's more good than bad to it.  If it can evolve over time (and I see no reason why not) then we're likely to find an even more comfortable compromise as we go forwards.

[Sailboat]

Have only read a few pages of this thread, so pardon me if this point has been discussed,  but it strikes me that the utility of this change is rather low.

 

Let's say I want to name my new Brute and decide Brutality is the perfect name.  But it's taken already on the server my friends are on!  Oh no! 

 

Thanks to the new policy however,  there's a chance it will become available in the future if it gets released due to inactivity.  I am determined to get that name.

 

So how do I do that?  Name release could occur at any moment over the coming...let's see...months and years.

 

Am I going to log in constantly over the coming months and years to try for the name?  That seems a bit deranged.  It will result in stress and disappointment for me over and over yet have a pretty low chance of ever resulting in my getting the name.

 

The only tangible benefit I can see from this change is to give the Homecoming team some cover from people whining about not getting an ideal name.  "See, we did something about it."  Odds are pretty poor any given player will get a name they covet.

[justicebeliever]

What we have to face, though, is with each improvement added (and I'm sure there are more than the two above) - there is an added burden on those people coding up the back end.  I have a great deal of trust in them wanting to improve things and in their capability to do so but we have to recognize that their time is not a bottomless well that we can draw upon.  In that light, I really like the idea of a quick-and-simple fix now (as proposed in the original policy) along with something more nuanced and complex later on.  The advantage is that those later enhancements to the policy can be conceived of with experience of the limitations of a more simplistic and immediate one.

 

In the short term, it is unlikely that many people will be inconvenienced to any significant degree (no one in the first 30 days) and even for those who would have character names at risk after those first 30 days, they are at risk and not necessarily immediate threat of loss unless there just happens to be someone lined up and desperate to grab that name right now.  That seems statistically unlikely, to say the least.  Worst case scenario?  You have to change a name on a character.  That might be a bit of a pain but it's hardly the world falling in.

 

I know it can be frustrating to not be able to use the name you want.  The name I used way back in the day for my main was taken by the time I got to Homecoming and it was a bit of a blow.  However, it's not the end of the world, no matter how it comes about. 

 

At the end of the day:

• Will this policy cause a positive outcome for a significant number of players by freeing up names locked out by abandoned characters?  Probably.
  
• Will this policy cause a negative outcome for a significant number of players who are totally not using placeholders to hoard names?  Probably not.
  
• Can the policy be improved upon with more work by the dev team?  Almost certainly
  
• Is the policy set in stone for all time?  What I have read suggests not
  

 

What the above suggests is that the policy is probably a good first step (and almost certainly not a final one) in balancing the community's needs regarding character names.  It's not going to meet everyone's needs but, on balance, there's more good than bad to it.  If it can evolve over time (and I see no reason why not) then we're likely to find an even more comfortable compromise as we go forwards.

 

This.  Well stated!

[Captain Fabulous]

Am I going to log in constantly over the coming months and years to try for the name?  That seems a bit deranged.  It will result in stress and disappointment for me over and over yet have a pretty low chance of ever resulting in my getting the name.

 

Because it is deranged, and it's not the purpose of the name rules. I suggest picking another name and being happy with that.

 

Seriously, WTH is wrong with all you people who dream up these crazy ass ridiculous scenarios and present them as if it's going to be the majority of players?

[Greyhawke]

As such, I would personally like to see something implemented where you also gain protection for a name based on time playing the character, to offer roleplayers and content runners the same protections offered powergamers at a quicker pace than they might get it otherwise, since as-is the policy rewards powergamers an inordinate amount.

 

 

Good points here

[Greyhawke]

So how do I do that?  Name release could occur at any moment over the coming...let's see...months and years.

 

Am I going to log in constantly over the coming months and years to try for the name?  That seems a bit deranged.  It will result in stress and disappointment for me over and over yet have a pretty low chance of ever resulting in my getting the name.

 

 

/firend Brutality. Watch your friends list when you log in. When you don't see Brutality, go get the name. Pretty simple and takes relatively little time and effort.

[Greyhawke]

Most of the people I see that don't like the name release policy as is are still in favor of some kind of policy. My opinion is the 1-5 limit needs increased to 45 or 60 days, and the "forever" limit needs to be changed to level 40.

 

I would love if they could also find a way to give one name lock token to each person, but i realize with the ease of making multiple accounts it could be a problem. Maybe one per IP?

[Erydanus]

My personal take on the name policy is that it is a good policy. It is very smart of our hosts to implement an aggressive policy and implement it pretty early.

 

I was reading on an unrelated forum and was absolutely aghast when someone commented about going and "reserving" the names of more than THREE DOZEN of their old characters. I thought to myself, "You ass." That is like walking up to the cookie jar and instead of taking 1 cookie, maybe 2, you grab the whole jar and walk off with it to eat later.

 

I get it. I GET IT. You want everything you had before back, and you want it right now. Understandable.

But unreasonable.

 

Everybody who was playing before had the same traumatic experience. We are all so fortunate to have this opportunity back. And we have to BE REASONABLE ADULTS and share this resource. And that means only creating characters we actually intend to play in a practical timeframe.

 

You want to roll an alt for a planned thing with friends next week, be my guest. You want to camp on 30 names you will work on from now until next year, it's a moral wrong in my judgement.

 

MORAL WRONG. Because at that point you are preventing others from having the same fun that you want, and your fun is not more important than my fun and my fun is not more important than the next player's fun. We all need to take our cookie, sit down and eat it, and then come back for seconds.

 

[MWRuger]

I didn't read the entire thread, just the first 9 pages.

 

Honestly, I'm somebody who created all his old alts on the first few days to get their names. Likely, It wouldn't have mattered, but I did. So I have about 35 guys named and most at level 2. I play just about every day, but usually play a handful of characters at one time.

 

But this naming policy seems OK to me. I'll just do an excel spreadsheet and make sure i login. Oh wait, I already did one to keep track of day jobs! Never Mind.

 

I'm sorry people feel this is a deal breaker and need to leave Homecoming, but pursue your bliss. I like having a lot of people on, but I can always just run my own server for my friends and me, the main thing is the game will never go away again.

 

That said, I'll stay here as long as it remains open. I like the mix of powers and diversification that Leandro came up with for I25, the QOL changes and the other things that the Homecoming team have implemented and adherence to the original spirit of the live servers. 

 

Thanks for letting me play again before I died. It's all I ever wanted when the game left and you guys made it happen. It may sound weird to attach so much to an ephemeral object like an MMO, but this came makes my life better!

[Bananiac]

Question again on the costume contest - if this hasn't been mentioned before  (at least search function didn't give any result):

 

Do characters need backstory? Would it help? Doesn't matter?

 

How is this done here usually?

 

...last one I took part must have been 10... 11... years ago 8)

[lobster]

Just an update on the multiboxing stuff: We no longer have Mastermind-specific restrictions. The other rules still apply. Follow them or be forever snapped out existence.

 

This is wonderful, thank you! :)

 

I know what I'm (finally) doing this weekend after I get my new computer built!

[Quixotic]

I suffer from crippling altitis and I think this policy is very fair and generous.

 

If for whatever circumstances you truly can't login to a lowbie character once a month, wouldn't it be fair to give that name to a player who can and get more use out of it? Remember that CoX is a shared gaming environment folks, everyone deserves their chance of the fun.

[Captain Fabulous]

So how do I do that?  Name release could occur at any moment over the coming...let's see...months and years.

 

Am I going to log in constantly over the coming months and years to try for the name?  That seems a bit deranged.  It will result in stress and disappointment for me over and over yet have a pretty low chance of ever resulting in my getting the name.

 

 

/firend Brutality. Watch your friends list when you log in. When you don't see Brutality, go get the name. Pretty simple and takes relatively little time and effort.

 

It doesn't work this way. Character names aren't taken away, simply unlocked. Characters keep an unlocked name until someone else tries to use it. Only at that point is the name lost.

[Captain Fabulous]

Most of the people I see that don't like the name release policy as is are still in favor of some kind of policy. My opinion is the 1-5 limit needs increased to 45 or 60 days, and the "forever" limit needs to be changed to level 40.

 

I would love if they could also find a way to give one name lock token to each person, but i realize with the ease of making multiple accounts it could be a problem. Maybe one per IP?

 

It won't matter. Regardless of what the time frames are there will always be people who claim they aren't long enough. Or the cutoff level for "never" isn't low enough.

 

I stand by my (and others') statements: if you can't be bothered to periodically log in characters to keep the name, then that name and/or character isn't all that important to you.

[Zolgar]

I actually have an unpopular opinion regarding this... I think a level 50 should not be immune... I think they should get 1-2 years max and then their name is freed up. Same concept - if it is that important to you... log it in.

 

 

I actually agree here. I'm just saying that if we have a system that protects character names, it should account for all play styles.

 

Your "hours online" proposal makes no sense and won't help those people who are the most vocal in this thread as they simply make a character and never play it again...so they have the name. Your suggestion makes no sense to me because if a character is logging in and accumulating 20-40-60-100 hours... they are logging in and will not be affected by this policy. (I say that in a non-confrontational way because I don't see how a character being played for 40 hours is in danger...because they're not).

 

If someone has 100 characters they can't be arsed to actually play, at all, I don't give a damn about their character names.

 

My point on the hours thing is protection against life getting in the way of your gaming, which I said in my original post on the subject.

 

There's a lot of things that can happen to lead to a person not being able to log in for 30 days or more; military deployment, sudden illness or injury, chronic illness, computer failure, moving, loss of internet, etc.

 

Allow me to provide two scenarios:

I build a new character for PvP, I PL them to 50 (not that every 50 is PL'd, at all, just bear with me please), in all of 4 hours. I realize I need to farm more merits and/or inf to complete the build, so I shelf it. I plan to get back to it in about a week after I am doing farming up the resources for it, but my laptop dies. I can't afford a new computer for at least a month.

 

Three friends and I decide to play through Praetoria's story arcs and get the badge for switching alignments a ton. Because we want this badge, we need to turn XP off quite a bit. Maybe we're also roleplaying through, which slows us down on leveling even further. We play for 4 hours every Monday. After the second week we're still only level 5 because we had to turn off XP. Again, my laptop dies (I really need a new laptop if it dies this much ;)).

 

In the first scenario, it doesn't matter how long I am away from the game unable to log in, I will not lose the character name.

In the second scenario, if I can't get a new computer in 30 days, I could lose the name. Even though I have spent more time, and probably have more attachment to that character's name than I do the character in the first scenario.

 

As far as I understand it, the idea behind using character level as a metric for how long a character name is protected, is to provide a player with protection for their characters when life happens based on how much work/how attached to a character you are. My suggestion adds a second metric to check for that protection, to account for other play styles.

 

We cannot measure a persons attachment to their characters in any meaningful way, if we look at the metrics of what level they are and how much time they have spent on the character though, we can get an idea. Are they a high level? Then they probably really enjoy playing that character. Have the clocked a lot of hours? Then they probably really enjoy playing that character.

[CY13ERPUNK]

Name policy's goofy, but better than nothing. It's the 1000 slots that enables hoarding and making people sit through a few load screens a month to keep their camps isn't that much of a deterrence. Just drop the cap down to 50 so camping a name actually takes up some of a limited resource and make +1 character slots a reward for level 50 and/or purchasable for several hundred merits.

 

i can 2nd this, sounds completely reasonable ; 50 to start then with the potential to earn 100 more slots ; that would be 150 different/individual character per shard, sounds like plenty imho

 

also combining a time-spent-ingame as well as character lvl seems like the 'most fair' metric if we are to have one

 

again lets all realize that we only have this becuz this group is being fucking awesome and hosting this for us ; i for one am immensely grateful ; sure we want our 'leaders' to be just and fair and not Tyrannical , but still , lets all remember how/why we are here ; thanks again everyone involved =]

[MunkiLord]

Good step in the right direction, but i still think the name restriction should be crossshard, if someone is named "captain capitanose"(made up name, if its still free use it) on one shard there should be no one using that name on an other shard. This way you can transfer your character without having to rename it.

 

That's a terrible suggestion. If you someday choose to transfer a character and the name isn't available, that's life.

 

Everything looks good to me guys. Only issue I have is multiboxing. it has been shown in the past to be unhealthy in the long term for a game, but it seems like most the issues that crop up with multiboxing won't be as bad here considering this is CoH and yall can fix the markets if they get to out of whack.

 

How exactly has it been shown to be unhealthy long term for a game?

 

no to multi-boxing.  pretty sure some kind of scam/spam/hack things will happen.

 

What are you talking about?