Castles and Cottages: Ancient History

[siolfir]

8 hours ago, Snarky said:

Wow.  You went out of your way to miss the point.  Kudos.

 

Many clones (in comic world....also in real world actually) are weaker than the Prime version and suffer ill effects that the Prime does not.

 

But beyond that (obvious to me anyways) difference.  The concept of Rage increasing Strength (like the Hulk for instance) is not uncommon in storytelling.  Therefore I call for Rage Strength Monsters to all be lumped into that trope.  There are a large number of Super Strength characters in storytelling that have NO rage issues.  Superman (might get angry but this has no influence on his Strength, and indeed he is usually written calm), Colossus, not an angry guy.  The Tick, not angry.  Usually quite carefree and happy actually.  Does have a "Drama Power" whereby he gets stronger depending on the needs of the story arc.  But not more angry.  If anything he seems more clueless than usual.  Wait, thats not possible, scratch that. 

 

Basically there are many story arcs that have a Super Strength Hero who is not a Rage monster.  The Hulk is the quintessential Rage monster.  Therefor I refer to Rage Strentgh characters as Hulk Clones, whether or not they crash.  The crash (which I dislike but have played for literally years of in game time) is not what kills Super Strength on certain characters for me.  It is the CONCEPT of always being pissed and having to write that into the backstory.

To address the first highlight, they're actually all lumped into one Archetype: Brutes. Which you seem to play a lot of, by your own testimony, so I'm curious how it's acceptable there for your backstories (to make you think about the second highlight).

 

I feel like there wouldn't be this hangup about as many concepts if it were named something that wasn't Rage and had a different description that didn't talk about anger. Honestly, Titan Weapons fits as well or better for a "super strength" concept considering one of the options is smashing people with a railroad sign.

[BZRKR]

36 minutes ago, siolfir said:

Honestly, Titan Weapons fits as well or better for a "super strength" concept considering one of the options is smashing people with a railroad sign.

Oh Man! If you could do Titan Weapon attacks with a random object pulled from the things that Propel can throw, and the item refreshed every time you did a redraw animation that would be AWESOME!

[MTeague]

26 minutes ago, BZRKR said:

Oh Man! If you could do Titan Weapon attacks with a random object pulled from the things that Propel can throw, and the item refreshed every time you did a redraw animation that would be AWESOME!

Forklift Melee?  Yea, I could see the appeal 😄

[gamingglen]

I want to throw pool tables, telephone poles, full gas canisters (BOOM!) and buses.  Oh, wait...

 

By the way, where's the spittle?  How can one go berserk without spittle flying every which way?  😉  

[Myrmidon]

49 minutes ago, BZRKR said:

Oh Man! If you could do Titan Weapon attacks with a random object pulled from the things that Propel can throw, and the item refreshed every time you did a redraw animation that would be AWESOME!

I did ask for something like this for Hurl back on the live forums (funny enough, Castle was the Dev that answered as I recall) and was told that it couldn’t be done. I bet the HC team has an excellent chance of being able to make it so.

[Snarky]

1 hour ago, siolfir said:

To address the first highlight, they're actually all lumped into one Archetype: Brutes. Which you seem to play a lot of, by your own testimony, so I'm curious how it's acceptable there for your backstories (to make you think about the second highlight).

 

I feel like there wouldn't be this hangup about as many concepts if it were named something that wasn't Rage and had a different description that didn't talk about anger. Honestly, Titan Weapons fits as well or better for a "super strength" concept considering one of the options is smashing people with a railroad sign.

I hereby testify that I play a LOT of Brutes.  heh.

 

The Brute Fury inherent (even though it uses an anger related word) is more about momentum as a device.  Like the Juggernaut, Brutes just pick up steam.  On my Dark/Dark Brute main the Brute inherent works very well with his theme.  He is a vampire.  (my forum picture is Willem Dafoe in Shadow of the Vampire)  Dark/Dark drains enemies for health and endurance, and even uses their life essences to power greater attacks, while draining their vitality.  Just being around enemies makes my Vampire start to be more powerful (Fury mechanic)  working up an appetite...

 

Rage is harder (for me) to explain away.  Partly because it is so well and simply written as to what it is.  Get angry, be more powerful, then have a Rage crash.  To me this makes sense.  What other explanation is there for the crash?  

 

Super Strength ticks off many of the boxes that comic book strength has.  Throwing heavy things, stomping to do damage, hand clap stun (a colossus trick btw) but the Rage mechanic is a particular subset of Super Strength.  It is definitively not all comic book super strength characters.

 

I could easily roll a Invul/Super Strength Tank if the ver2 SS had no Rage.  Then I would have a character with no Rage, no Fury, and even more armor.  In fact a character that would incite others to rage (taunt) as he stayed cool and effective.  (Chess Master)

 

[Col. Kernel]

I'm more or less in favor of the cottage rule because someone is using that power you want to change as it is and they don't want it changed (doesn't apply to minor tweaks to powers).

 

Having said that, if a power has significant shortcomings that have many players up in arms the solution seems obvious to me.  They can quit the game.  Just kidding!!!  The solution is the same one applied to Practiced Brawler, make a mutually exclusive power on the same tier and let the players choose which one they want to take.  There are some really sucktastic powers out there that someone loves but most people just flat out skip them.  IIRC Black Hole from Dark Blast is one such.  So let the devs make a new power at that tier and players can pick the new power or Black Hole.

[Snarky]

35 minutes ago, Col. Kernel said:

I'm more or less in favor of the cottage rule because someone is using that power you want to change as it is and they don't want it changed (doesn't apply to minor tweaks to powers).

 

Having said that, if a power has significant shortcomings that have many players up in arms the solution seems obvious to me.  They can quit the game.  Just kidding!!!  The solution is the same one applied to Practiced Brawler, make a mutually exclusive power on the same tier and let the players choose which one they want to take.  There are some really sucktastic powers out there that someone loves but most people just flat out skip them.  IIRC Black Hole from Dark Blast is one such.  So let the devs make a new power at that tier and players can pick the new power or Black Hole.

that may be trickier with a power like Rage that the rest of SS is built around.  i do like the way you think though.  right to the point.

[MTeague]

 

46 minutes ago, Col. Kernel said:

The solution is the same one applied to Practiced Brawler, make a mutually exclusive power on the same tier and let the players choose which one they want to take. 

 

My understanding is that that caused the HC Devs significant headaches, and more-or-less got a "Never Again" statement that they realllllly don't want to expand upon that. 

That said.... it does feel like it's really the "right" way forward for at least some of these kinds of issues.

 

There is the whole "have a hammer, everything looks like a nail", concerns about having powersets get toooo many branches, etc.

"Why not both?" sounds Great from the players point of view.  And we're talking Tony-The-Tiger levels of Great here. 

But I get why as the developer, that causes migraines.

[Judasace]

2 hours ago, Snarky said:

What other explanation is there for the crash?  

 

Sugar Crash?

[Vanden]

3 hours ago, Snarky said:

What other explanation is there for the crash?  

Lots of things can make you tired, not just getting angry. Sustaining an 80% damage buff and 20% ToHit buff for 120 seconds when most can only keep that up for 10 seconds will do that to you.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Vanden

[Col. Kernel]

2 hours ago, MTeague said:

 

 

My understanding is that that caused the HC Devs significant headaches, and more-or-less got a "Never Again" statement that they realllllly don't want to expand upon that. 

That said.... it does feel like it's really the "right" way forward for at least some of these kinds of issues.

 

There is the whole "have a hammer, everything looks like a nail", concerns about having powersets get toooo many branches, etc.

"Why not both?" sounds Great from the players point of view.  And we're talking Tony-The-Tiger levels of Great here. 

But I get why as the developer, that causes migraines.

Well they've reverse engineered everything else.  Maybe they can rewrite CoH in it's entirety and give us that.

[_NOPE_]

3 hours ago, Col. Kernel said:

I'm more or less in favor of the cottage rule because someone is using that power you want to change as it is and they don't want it changed (doesn't apply to minor tweaks to powers).

 

Having said that, if a power has significant shortcomings that have many players up in arms the solution seems obvious to me.  They can quit the game.  Just kidding!!!  The solution is the same one applied to Practiced Brawler, make a mutually exclusive power on the same tier and let the players choose which one they want to take.  There are some really sucktastic powers out there that someone loves but most people just flat out skip them.  IIRC Black Hole from Dark Blast is one such.  So let the devs make a new power at that tier and players can pick the new power or Black Hole.

Welcome to two pages ago!

[_NOPE_]

31 minutes ago, Col. Kernel said:

Well they've reverse engineered everything else.  Maybe they can rewrite CoH in it's entirety and give us that.

But, see, they didn't really reverse engineer it. They were given the code, just like the rest of us. That's not reverse engineering. That's... engineering, I suppose.

[Col. Kernel]

14 minutes ago, The Philotic Knight said:

Welcome to two pages ago!

I'm late to the party.  Guess my invitation got lost in the mail.  😄

 

[Col. Kernel]

15 minutes ago, The Philotic Knight said:

But, see, they didn't really reverse engineer it. They were given the code, just like the rest of us. That's not reverse engineering. That's... engineering, I suppose.

I suppose.  I mean even tho they had the code there were some major difficulties at the beginning.  Or at least that's what I've heard.

[_NOPE_]

6 hours ago, Col. Kernel said:

I suppose.  I mean even tho they had the code there were some major difficulties at the beginning.  Or at least that's what I've heard.

Yeah, because the code is the worst kind of spaghetti code, overly complicated as hell.

[Blackbird71]

On 4/27/2021 at 1:12 PM, Jimmy said:

For me, the most important thing is that a powerset / character doesn't completely lose a capability or function that it already has - even if an individual power is completely changed, or a respec is required, or some effort needs to be put in.

 

OK, I came to this thread a bit late and have been catching up.  I've seen this idea expressed by a number of people here, that completely changing or even replacing and individual power does not violate the Cottage Rule so long as the powerset retains its overall functionality.

The problem with this idea is that it's literally not what the Cottage Rule is.

 

Quote

An existing power will not have its core functionality and purpose changed, though its strength may be altered and effects secondary to the power's true purpose may be added or removed.

 

Cottage Rule - Unofficial Homecoming Wiki (cityofheroes.dev)

 

"An existing power," not "power set."  Period.  You can make the argument that changing the core functionality of a power is justified or necessary, and do it in a way that still preserves the general feel of the power set.  But you can't claim that doing so still follows the Cottage Rule because that's not what the rule itself says.  It has always been about changes to individual powers, not power sets as a whole.  If you want to follow the "change powers but keep the overall set similar" mantra, that's a new rule, and something different. 

Why am I emphasizing this?  Because definitions are important to communication.  When one person claims something violates the Cottage Rule and another claims that it doesn't, unless there is a unified and consistent definition of what the Cottage Rule is then the argument will never be resolved and both parties will believe the other is being disingenuous and false, which does not help communication or finding solutions.  

 

So if the HC devs want to follow a guideline different than the Cottage Rule, fine, that's their prerogative.  But they need to communicate that clearly; not twist the meaning of an old guideline into something that it's not.  That will just create confusion and resentment among the players. 

 

 

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Blackbird71

[arcane]

On 4/27/2021 at 3:12 PM, Jimmy said:

Disclaimer: This is just my personal view, not that of the entire team.

 

I agree with several of the posters here - it's more of a guide than a hard rule.

 

For me, the most important thing is that a powerset / character doesn't completely lose a capability or function that it already has - even if an individual power is completely changed, or a respec is required, or some effort needs to be put in.

 

Some recent examples:

• Energy Melee: Stun (the power) is fundamentally gone, yes, but the set is still completely stacked with single target stun.
• Teleportation: Recall Friend and Teleport Foe are technically gone, but the set can still do both. Long Range Teleport is gone, but your character can still gain this power another way.
• Flight: The old version of Afterburner is gone, but its speed buff is now included in Fly, and its defence is included in Evasive Maneuvers.
• Tactical Arrow: Agility was removed, but Gymnastics inherited most of its effects.
• Concealment: The new version of Stealth does (almost) everything old Invisibility and Stealth used to do. The only missing component was being able to put yourself into OAS, which the new P2W power does for free.

Fundamentally these sets (and the characters who have them) can still do everything they did before (with, of course, balance adjustments where required), and that's what counts.

@Blackbird71Did you see this post?

 

You are correct that your quoted definition above does indeed refer to a specific power. But I’m saying no one has ever treated that as a hard rule, but they have, as above, tried to make sure core functionalities are not completely destroyed.

 

So the question is: would you and others prefer that the cottage rule be more strictly taken literally with none of this flexibility? I didn’t think players had much of an appetite for that since most of them react pretty badly when I invoke the thing even in its more flexible form.

Edited May 5, 2021 by arcane

[Blackbird71]

1 minute ago, arcane said:

@Blackbird71Did you see this post?

 

Considering that's the exact post I quoted from and am disagreeing with, yes, I did.  What is your point?

[arcane]

1 minute ago, Blackbird71 said:

 

Considering that's the exact post I quoted from and am disagreeing with, yes, I did.  What is your point?

Sorry, edited for more.. of a point.

[arcane]

I think your point might be more just to stop calling this “flexible cottage rule” (aka, how the cottage rule has been carried out in practice) the cottage rule when it doesn’t meet the definition of the literal cottage rule. I’m fine with that point, but note it’s simply easier to invoke two words that have always been applied flexibly than to write out everything every single time it comes up just because of this discrepancy that has always existed.

Edited May 5, 2021 by arcane

[PeregrineFalcon]

36 minutes ago, arcane said:

So the question is: would you and others prefer that the cottage rule be more strictly taken literally with none of this flexibility?

Yes! I hate when people constantly try to redefine words or phrases.

 

The Cottage Rule says "a power", not "a powerset." They are not the same thing. And it's not that the Cottage Rule can't ever be broken, it's that it's something that should only ever be done when there's no other option.

 

But how do you know when it's time to break the rule when you don't even know what it is because people keep changing the definition?

[arcane]

Ok well let’s coin the “Jimmy Rule” then since it better describes so many people’s idea of their desired path for this game 🙂
 

Even though I think the “Jimmy Rule” is just how the “Cottage Rule” has always been implemented with flexibility since launch, and the “Cottage Rule” now just describes a theoretical rule that has never really been much of a thing in reality.

Edited May 5, 2021 by arcane

[PeregrineFalcon]

7 minutes ago, arcane said:

Ok well let’s coin the “Jimmy Rule” then since it better describes so many people’s idea of their desired path for this game 🙂

Well sure. Except that the Cottage Rule was an actual rule that both the Paragon devs and the Homecoming devs actually followed. Whereas your "Jimmy Rule" is something that you just made up because of your distain for other people's ideas on this subject.

 

7 minutes ago, arcane said:

Even though I think the “Jimmy Rule” is just how the “Cottage Rule” has always been implemented with flexibility since launch, and the “Cottage Rule” now just describes a theoretical rule that has never really been much of a thing in reality.

Wrong again. The Cottage Rule hasn't been flexibly implemented, it's been occasionally broken when the devs felt it necessary. Which is exactly how rules are supposed to be treated.

 

By the way, can you name one instance in which the Homecoming developers broke the Cottage Rule?