Time to enforce the name holding expiration rules

[Alchemystic]

6 minutes ago, Doc_Scorpion said:

Which translates to "an active character should be at no risk"...  A player cannot be free of risk unless all of their characters are free of risk.
 

 

And that's the crux of my disagreement with the proposal - the presumption of guilt.  The requirement that I (as an active player) must prove my innocence to maintain the privilege of being allowed to keep my characters.

No.  An active player should never be at risk of losing a name because others deem him unworthy of having it.

 What's the saying again... Use it or lose it?

 

On a more serious note, I don't care about guilt or innocence. That's why I made the formula, to mathematically decipher which characters names should be released without launching an inquest into their moral practices.

 

It's just numbers, and that's all we should really consider. 

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Tyrannical

[aethereal]

I think what I'd really like is some allowance for name duplications, only if a character is retired.  Like, where you could "take" a name that someone else has, only if they meet some metric for inactivity (and I think that all the various metrics for inactivity that people are proposing are all basically fine, and splitting hairs), but when you "take" their name, they don't lose it, you both have it.

 

How exactly that would look, I don't know, and it doesn't seem super important because this would almost certainly be a total nightmare to implement and not worth the effort.

 

But it would be a nice nod, I think, to how it typically has worked in the comics.

[UltraAlt]

1 minute ago, Tyrannical said:

Yes because the HC devs are going to implement this secretly and tell nobody about it.

 

Look at your character roster, they're all generic'd already.

I think it's pretty standard in any game that only 10% of the players ever go to the forums for anything except to get questions answered.

There is probably a much higher percentage of City of Heroes players that come to the forums, but think it is a pretty accurate guess that it is well less than 25% of the players.

Saying that, players don't have as much reason to come to the forums to ask questions as the City of Heroes /help channel kicks so much booty.

 

So yeah, if the DEVs announce it in the GMOTD some players will catch it that don't come to the forums, but, honestly, I pretty much blow off the GMOTD myself and jump into the action.

 

And I don't know who you are to say that "Look at your character roster, they're all generic'd already."

You have no idea what my character are unless you are a DEV and you are digging into my account.

 

All my characters have bios. They are all character-conception based.

 

So if you think that taking my names is so important to you then why are you telling me that they are generic?

It is insulting to say that.

[Snowdaze]

3 minutes ago, aethereal said:

I think what I'd really like is some allowance for name duplications, only if a character is retired.  Like, where you could "take" a name that someone else has, only if they meet some metric for inactivity (and I think that all the various metrics for inactivity that people are proposing are all basically fine, and splitting hairs), but when you "take" their name, they don't lose it, you both have it.

 

How exactly that would look, I don't know, and it doesn't seem super important because this would almost certainly be a total nightmare to implement and not worth the effort.

 

But it would be a nice nod, I think, to how it typically has worked in the comics.

This would involve reprograming the whole game and how it uses character names.

[Alchemystic]

10 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

And I don't know who you are to say that "Look at your character roster, they're all generic'd already."

You have no idea what my character are unless you are a DEV and you are digging into my account.

 

All my characters have bios. They are all character-conception based.

 

So if you think that taking my names is so important to you then why are you telling me that they are generic?

It is insulting to say that.

 

Oh, sorry, I didn't think I would have to explain the joke.

 

The joke was that it would never happen.

 

And "generic'd" is a term used for characters who have had their names changed to a placeholder like "GENERIC19865"

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Tyrannical

[UltraAlt]

14 minutes ago, Snowdaze said:

No no no, don't do that! You are quoting you! I never said that.

Also if you didn't read the EULA, or make yourself open to notifications on discord or read the forums that's on the player.
if you dont log in to the game at least once a year you should be fair game!

That's your opinion. 

People post that they disagree with you.

Just because you post a lot doesn't mean you are correct.

[Snowdaze]

2 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

I think it's pretty standard in any game that only 10% of the players ever go to the forums for anything except to get questions answered.

There is probably a much higher percentage of City of Heroes players that come to the forums, but think it is a pretty accurate guess that it is well less than 25% of the players.

Saying that, players don't have as much reason to come to the forums to ask questions as the City of Heroes /help channel kicks so much booty.

 

So yeah, if the DEVs announce it in the GMOTD some players will catch it that don't come to the forums, but, honestly, I pretty much blow off the GMOTD myself and jump into the action.

Well if the policy only affects people who have not logged on in over a year they are not going to see a MOTD in game because THEY ARENT PLAYING!
If they don't want to keep up to date by being on the HC discord or at least visiting the forums to read update news. That's their prerogative.
If they didn't read the EULA at least once...That their fault!
If a player wants to remain ignorant that is on them.

[Snowdaze]

6 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

That's your opinion. 

People post that they disagree with you.

Just because you post a lot doesn't mean you are correct.

Just because people disagree doesn't mean I'm wrong either.
The game has a EULA thats what it's there for is to notify people of policies regarding the game.
People can choose to be uninformed, but if HC decides to define inactivity as a lack of logging on in the last 365 days then thats what it is defined as!

I'm here to try and solve the problem of a Finite name pool, some people are here to shoot down any idea because they feel they are entitled to owning something that is provided as a free service...

I do maintain if you play the game you will have nothing to worry about!

Edited December 14, 2020 by Snowdaze

[AerialAssault]

Just a side note on the "Some people don't use the forums" topic;

 

You have to come to these forums to even set up your account in the first place. I can't speak for everyone but I have these forums bookmarked, and even set as one of the default pages to open on boot up. It's not some babylonian lost-aztec technology. And if people are dismissing the Message of the Day in-game then .. that's their fault? I don't know what else HC could do to make people read it aside from putting a timer on the 'Ok' button.

 

I work a lot in customer correspondence and let me tell you, a lot of people do not make it easy on themselves to stay informed.

 

In any case, a bulk e-mail giving a month's notice before any name purge program is run should suffice. 

[ZacKing]

1 hour ago, Doc_Scorpion said:

Because an active player should not be burdened or punished for have inactive characters.  This goes beyond "freeing up names from players that have left, almost certainly never to return" and into the realm of "force everyone to justify their worthiness to a name" (with more than a whiff of "eff the powerlevelers").  It's gone from "freeing up names" and started into "taking vengeance" territory.

That is unacceptable.

This is exactly what it is.  Those crying about names being held on active accounts can't answer why they're more entitled to a name than the owner of the active account. if an account is still active, they can contact the owner and ask for the name to be released and the owner has every right to say no if they want.

[Snowdaze]

4 minutes ago, AerialAssault said:

Just a side note on the "Some people don't use the forums" topic;

 

You have to come to these forums to even set up your account in the first place. I can't speak for everyone but I have these forums bookmarked, and even set as one of the default pages to open on boot up. It's not some babylonian lost-aztec technology. And if people are dismissing the Message of the Day in-game then .. that's their fault? I don't know what else HC could do to make people read it aside from putting a timer on the 'Ok' button.

 

I work a lot in customer correspondence and let me tell you, a lot of people do not make it easy on themselves to stay informed.

 

In any case, a bulk e-mail giving a month's notice before any name purge program is run should suffice. 

Where I don't disagree, That is a LOT of emails though... and also may or may not take the most effort for the volunteer staff, excessive emails may also trigger spam filters, and is the most inconsistent form of notification since some people may read it and others it will just fade into the flood of spam and ads. And lastly aside from the use of an email to sign up. The HC Devs do not has a history of communicating through this media and thus it is the least expected as well.

 

I feel that if it is posted in the forums and discord, and the EULA and notification that the EULA is changing is made, then due diligence has been served.

[Snowdaze]

3 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

This is exactly what it is.  Those crying about names being held on active accounts can't answer why they're more entitled to a name than the owner of the active account. if an account is still active, they can contact the owner and ask for the name to be released and the owner has every right to say no if they want.

Please read all the posts in the thread, that is not what everyone is suggesting.

[Alchemystic]

4 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

This is exactly what it is.  Those crying about names being held on active accounts can't answer why they're more entitled to a name than the owner of the active account. if an account is still active, they can contact the owner and ask for the name to be released and the owner has every right to say no if they want.

 

I'd argue that nobody is entitled to anything.

 

We don't pay subscriptions, we're here at the generosity of the Homecoming team, and what they decide to do with their server isn't up to us.

 

[Starforge]

Just now, Tyrannical said:

I'd argue that nobody is entitled to anything.

Wouldn’t guess that reading the forums lol.

[Snowdaze]

1 minute ago, Starforge said:

Wouldn’t guess that reading the forums lol.

Tyrannical speaks truth, on this issue he is basically the anarchist that wants names to consistently be a form of free-for-all pvp!

[Starforge]

I mean, I know the guy personally. He’s just spitballing ideas on name policies. He isn’t even looking for specific names from anyone so that makes some of the responses in this thread fairly comedic.

[aethereal]

For villains, you can take the name of any other villain but if you do you're permanently flagged for PVP from them in all zones.  😛

 

(This is not a serious suggestion.  Though it would be hilarious.)

[ZacKing]

48 minutes ago, Tyrannical said:

 What's the saying again... Use it or lose it?

No, it's first come, first serve or possession is 9/10ths of the law.  When you're offline, can I take your character name and use it?  You're not using it so you should lose it.

[Alchemystic]

Just now, Snowdaze said:

Tyrannical speaks truth, on this issue he is basically the anarchist that wants names to consistently be a form of free-for-all pvp!

 

1 minute ago, Starforge said:

I mean, I know the guy personally. He’s just spitballing ideas on name policies. He isn’t even looking for specific names from anyone so that makes some of the responses in this thread fairly comedic.

 

You're both right

[Alchemystic]

Just now, ZacKing said:

No, it's first come, first serve or possession is 9/10ths of the law.  When you're offline, can I take your character name and use it?  You're not using it so you should lose it.

 

If my character has been inactive for half a year and not got past level 10, go for it.

[Rathulfr]

Things have gone pretty far afield here.  The facts are these:

 

1. There is X number of character accounts, each with Y number of named characters.  For the moment, those names are reserved to those accounts, forever.
2. Last year, the HC team indicated that there will be a naming policy that releases character name reservations under certain conditions.  However, that naming policy is not currently effective.  They indicated that they will announce when they decide to start enforcing that policy.
3. In this thread, the HC team indicated that they will not announce nor enforce the policy until they feel it's bullet-proof.  In the meantime, all names are reserved to those who got them first, forever.

The OP and others in this thread indicated that they'd like to see the policy activated and enforced.  Some of us in this thread have suggested changes to the announced policy before it is implemented.

 

There's one set of commenters who think the announced name policy should be applied to idle characters.  In this case, "idle" is defined as characters of a certain level that have not entered the game within a certain period of time (as described in the announced name policy).  This would allow other players to create new characters with those names, instead.  This could be considered the "use it or lose it rule".

 

There's another set of commenters who think the announced name policy should be applied to idle accounts.  In this case, "idle" is defined as accounts that have not logged into the game at all, on any character, within a certain period of time (such as 1 year).  This is the policy that was in effect during retail: the name policy applied to inactive accounts, i.e., those without an active subscription or any other account activity within the past 90 days [source].  This could be considered the "show up or lose it rule".

 

Personally, I'm in the latter category (accounts).  I think the criteria should be based on account activity, not character logon time.  If I'm an active player (meaning I logon at least once a year), then it shouldn't matter if I've got some oddball characters I only play once a year (e.g.: holiday-themed characters).  If I'm an active player, I shouldn't be forced to level all of my alts to 50 to keep their names forever.  I've got low-level alts that I keep at low-levels for specific reasons, and don't play all that frequently.  But I'm still an active account.

 

But if I'm not an active player -- I haven't or won't log on in over a year -- why should I get to keep my character names forever?  Why would it make any difference to me or anyone else?  If I'm not playing the game, why should I take precedence over others who do?  I provided an example where I brought a casual friend to the game last year, and he named a character "Florida Man", and played him up to about level 9.  I asked him if he ever planned on playing again, and he said, "Nah."  Now nobody else can ever play "Florida Man", even though this casual friend hasn't played (and won't) since May 2019.

 

I also know that there are several retail veterans who found out about Homecoming way later than spring/summer of 2019, and they'd love to play their original characters again.  But they can't, because others have taken their retail names.  Now if those others are still playing the game today, more power to them: first come, first served.  But if some of those others are not still playing -- and haven't played in more than a X period of time (1 year) -- why deny those returning players their original names, if they could be made available?  Why punish active players for the sake of idle/departed players?

 

Anyone reading or participating in this thread probably has nothing to fear.  If you care enough to be reading the forums, you're probably active enough to be exempt from the announced name policy.  The only players whose character names are at risk are those who: (a) don't bother to read the announcements/patch notes in the first place, (b) don't bother to logon to play low-level toons, or (c) aren't logging on at all anyway.

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Rathulfr

[Snowdaze]

4 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

No, it's first come, first serve or possession is 9/10ths of the law.  When you're offline, can I take your character name and use it?  You're not using it so you should lose it.

You don't own the name!!!!!

Unless you have filed for a copyright! It is an extension of the service being provided to you for free and is subject to any rules and stipulations set forth by Homecoming! You possess nothing! You are merely using something provided for you to use that you just so happen to choose at one point of time.

[Ruin Mage]

popcorn time.

zac, my man, you sound like smeagol.

[ZacKing]

7 minutes ago, Snowdaze said:

You don't own the name!!!!!

Unless you have filed for a copyright! It is an extension of the service being provided to you for free and is subject to any rules and stipulations set forth by Homecoming! You possess nothing! You are merely using something provided for you to use that you just so happen to choose at one point of time.

Correction - NCSoft owns the game code, not Homecoming.  Let's be honest about ownership here. 

[Snowdaze]

Just now, ZacKing said:

Correction - NCSoft owns the game code, not Homecoming.  Let's be honest about ownership here. 

please reread my original statement, I did not say Homecoming owns anything. Thank you.