Merits: How to drum up redside activity

[Naraka]

3 minutes ago, RageusQuitus2 said:

Love it but the reality is most of em cant play well and need training wheels.  Hence blueside.  Villains are the evolution of the playerbase.  Have been since cov left beta and first villains hit sirens call.

 

I'm not really super bias about which side.  I mainly see blueside as a vacation from Arachnos and Longbow missions, is all.

[ZemX]

3 minutes ago, Snarky said:

Everyone just go play Blueside.  Leave Redside open for the dedicated, the few, the villains.  But for the love of the powers above, and your own personal safety, stop F-ing whining about it.

 

No?

 

Look, it's great you get into being a villain that much, and I do that too sometimes, but mostly I play this game to run around in teams and hit things.  I can do that anywhere, but redside is content fewer people are running and who doesn't like a change of scenery from time to time?  The entire point of Going Rogue and Freedom was to let all the dirty capes run all over your lawn, Snarky.   Sorry.   But it stopped short of making it really easy.  It inexplicably allows a vigilante to join villainous contact missions... but not to run them.  Why?  What's the difference?  Why not go that one more step?

 

If they just let anybody run any content, how much skin off your back is that really?  Meanwhile, bored heroes can go run papers in Grandville as easily as radios in PI and you can sneer at them while they do it.

 

Everybody wins, right?

[Naraka]

1 minute ago, ZemX said:

 

I can do that anywhere, but redside is content fewer people are running and who doesn't like a change of scenery from time to time? 

You underestimate the fixation some players have on the dated skyboxes of the game.

[GraspingVileTerror]

I have some things to say.  Not all of which are going to get said in this post.

Thanks to those who showed their support, though.  It's appreciated.

 

There's a lot of basic, foundational stuff that I think certain members of this community need to get straightened out (and while I will be tagging certain posters later on in this post, I am not suggesting that all of these necessarily apply specifically to those of you who I will be calling upon later . . . but maybe just reflect on them all the same, yeh?  Could be helpful for one or two of you).

 

Important foundational stuff, like:  

"People who aren't playing the game the same way as [insert self here] aren't playing the game -wrong,- they're playing it differently.  The only wrong way to play is to ruin the game for others."

And "There's room enough for more ways to play then what we have even now.  Adding or expanding perspectives doesn't diminish anything that already exists.  And while it can be a delicate balancing act when it comes to -change,- those with a surplus in their favour may wish to consider letting a few things go so that others have a chance to reach a level of enjoyment which the former may be taking for granted."

 

AND "The themes and subject matter expressed in the content of this game have been authored by a dozen or two different people over the course of a decade-plus-change of Legacy/Retail, then another few during the years of SCoRE, followed by these couple more years here of Homecoming.  Perspectives of the very people who originally made this game, and everyone who came afterward to add their own contributions have held different views than one another, and it has only enriched the overall experience we have at our fingertips today.  While not everything is for everyone, the more there is of different things then the more there is for everyone to share."

 

A N D "Now more than ever, but even back in the days of Legacy/Retail, Players have been taking the plunge and becoming Developers and contributing to City of Heroes.  And that, too, is a good thing for the enrichment of City.  (See the point above about "not everything is for everyone.")"

 

 ...

 

All of that is basically a more elaborate way to try and say:  STOP ARGUING ABOUT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE HERE TO ENJOY!  

Unless someone is actively griefing, being toxic, or trolling.  And in that case, please  . . . PRETTY please, just report them to a GM.

Let people express themselves about the things they enjoy, and what doesn't quite work for them without telling them that they're WRONG for it.

Likewise, and on the other end of this equation:  When sharing your perspective, or (as an advocate) the perspective that other players have shared with you, bear in mind that it's not your job to crowd out different points of view.

 

Sure.  Offer suggestions for perspectives which you think some people may not have considered, but when they tell you "No, that's not me" please take it to heart.  Most people know themselves better than other people do.  Even those of us who studied psychology, human behaviour, sociology, and marketing have to admit there's a limit to our "insight" in to the personal lives of others.

 

 . . . 

 

Now for the part of this post I'll probably REALLY regret.  Apologies if this ends up causing any sort of escalation.  I was a little bit triggered, and felt the need to get some stuff off my chest.

 

@everyone-who-brought-it-up ...

Yeah . . . I've called for a "total rewrite" a time or two in the past.  It wasn't fair of me back then.  As much as I think Redside, or Blueside, or everywhichside could use a good, solid overhaul . . . I have to remind myself to respect the players who DO like the things we have right now.

Gotta practice what I preach.
 . . . buuuuuut . . . with that in mind . . . 

I would totally be down to work with many of you in fleshing out the existing content with OPTIONAL branching paths.

Give players the chance to play the missions exactly the ways they are right now, but also offer the players the chance to do that old content in a NEW way.  A fresh coat of paint, but the same familiar space.

Let's not give up hope on the Devs some day allowing that possibility to be explored.

 

 

@MTeague, no.

The age of this game and the era it came out in isn't an excuse.  

It's an explanation, sure.  It offers context as to where the starting line was . . . but it absolutely MUST NOT hold us back from progress.  The members of the Homecoming Team have demonstrated a willingness to do "The Impossible" on a number of occasions already.  While it would be cavalier to expect them to break through every barrier, we can at least offer them support and encouragement, and perhaps direct them toward the specific walls we want to see knocked down next.
Ultimately, they'll decide whatever it is that they want to decide . . . but they're also not the ONLY Devs we are ever going to have (fingers crossed, at least.  Let's not get shut down tomorrow!).  Just because the current Devs may not prioritize something, or may not even have the technical insight to overcome a limitation right now . . . it doesn't mean we should settle for obvious deficiencies.

Things can always get better.  Let's be optimistic AND realistic.  Let's acknowledge where the barriers are, and THEN offer suggestions on how to surmount them.  Or at least get around them.   Let's not be defeatists, please.

 

 

@UltraAlt, I wonder about you.  I really do.  And if you're entirely genuine and truly, honestly believe everything you say . . . then I worry about you.

It's not that I'm worried -of- you.  It's more that I worry FOR you.

I'm sorry that I can't find a better way to express this, and the perspective you have a tendency to express here is absolutely yours to have, AND I feel a bit like a hypocrite going and publicly calling you out like this . . . but . . . 

You DO realize that the things you say, and the way you say them . . . it's often expressed the way a VILLAIN does?

Like, for example:  "because you can't accept the truth."

That's exactly the sort of thing a villain utters during a monologue.  Like, pretty much verbatim.  Hell!  I almost feel like it's a direct quote from Dr. Doom or Lex Luther or Thanos . . . 

 

Couple that with the quote you posted of mine, and that you seem to have divorced my words from the point I was trying to make.

But, fair cop.  Maybe that one's entirely on me.  So, I'll give it another shot.

I didn't say "City of Villains failed."

I said:  "City of Heroes has generally failed as hard at accurately portraying heroics as City of Villains has failed at portraying villainy."
A few elements I wish to emphasize. 

The word "generally" is meant to convey that (from my perspective) when exploring the overall ludonarrative of both City of Heroes and City of Villains, examining them both with a broad lens, then I feel my conclusion AS IT APPLIES SPECIFICALLY TO THE CLAUSES EXPRESSLY STATED (specifically about how the only meaningful gameplay we're offered is "go to place, beat up thing") is that both City of Heroes and City of Villains have EQUALLY failed IN THE SPECIFIC CONTEXT of delivering a gameplay experience that encompasses the much broader definition of being a Hero or Villain in other media (including other video games, including MMOs).

Both City of Villains and City of Heroes are absolute TOURS DE FORCE in so many respects.  I wouldn't be here if I didn't think these games were great already.  I wouldn't have dedicated so many years, so many words, so much research, and so much of my free time if I thought the games were total failures.

It's just that to have something improve, you first need to acknowledge where the problems are.

 

It really looks like you completely missed the mark of what I was saying, and this wasn't the first time either.  It wasn't the first time that seems to have been the case with you missing other posters' intended messages either.

But hey.  Maybe you're just "clowning around," and you don't actually mean anything you've typed.  Maybe the efforts of the community to enrich this game and imbuing it with vitality and longevity is all just a joke to you.  And all the double-speak and classic misrepresentation is part of a front to give yourself a few laughs at all of our expense.

I honestly don't know.  Like I said:  I really do wonder about you.  I just don't know . . . 

 

 

@Luminara . . . 

Ok . . . there is something I've been wanting to say for years.  Like, I've said it plenty of times . . . but it really deserves it's own thread, instead of just a little comment here and a little comment there.  Fucking hell!  It deserves it's own thesis essay.

And your post triggered me on it.  And it's not personal.  I've Liked a number of things you've had to share in the forums over the past couple years.  Just . . . hot button, and you hit it.  Hard.

Buuuuut . . . this particular exercise has taken a lot out of me, and I'm just not ready to go down THAT particular rabbit hole right now, so . . . let's address the bit that I can work with right now:

 . . . what fucking comic books have YOU been reading?  Is that ALL you've really seen?!

Maybe flip through the pages again, yeah?

Give the medium a little more respect.  Please.

 

 

@Snarky.

Yes.

Redside needs a PROPER social hub.

Good point.

(Gotta have SOME positivity in this post, right?)

 

 

and @Bionic_Flea?
Sometimes even sleep requires effort.  Like right now, when I should be in bed.
Especially when there's so much City of Heroes to play and explore and break my mind trying to do my little part to elevate it . . . but there are only so few hours in a day.

 

(That last one isn't a real call-out.  Just an attempt at levity.  Please don't let Flea bite me!)

 

 

My apologies if I've been too harsh.

I do mean to be a positive influence in this community, and I'm not sure I necessarily handled the specifics in this reply as tactfully as I should have.

But I'm just at a point in terms of emotional energy and patience where I couldn't find a better way to express myself.  I think there were important issues that needed to be addressed, and this was the best I could muster to do so at this time.

 

I really should go to bed, though.

Night.

Hope to see you all again on the next day.

 

And Redside Bestside.

[Naraka]

1 hour ago, GraspingVileTerror said:

 

I said:  "City of Heroes has generally failed as hard at accurately portraying heroics as City of Villains has failed at portraying villainy."

 

What?  I don't get a shoutout?

 

But the point quoted is also one of the major sticking points that continuously boggles my brain when I hear people criticize the villain-side story.  It's often about how you're treated as a lackey or you don't have your own plans or you don't have agency and blah blah blah but the same criticism is absent for blue.

 

Another thing I hear is "Statesman or [insert famous hero] doesn't treat you like a sidekick" which makes me chuckle.  WHO WOULDN'T WANT TO BE STATESMAN'S SIDEKICK!?  I'm currently catching up on My Hero Academia and imagine All Might asking you to be his sidekick.  Most heroes will FIGHT to be his right hand!  But regardless, "treating" you is rather beside the point since it's not supposed to be negative treatment.  They're supposed to be heroes after all, not taskmasters (which is what they *actually* are in the game).

 

As for villains, why is everyone trying to be Doctor Doom?  I know he's awesome but get some creativity.  Like, imagine a game with the actual Doctor Doom as one of the top bosses in an area and some shlub expecting to just clean his clock because he's better.  You don't prove your villain is bad-A, you prove that now Doctor Doom is trash.  Now tell that to any Marvel fan and see if they think its a swell idea.  As for people treating you like garbage in CoX, I see it no worse than the game balance toward enemy mobs.  The only teeth NPCs have is through dialog now but I digress...I'm not against adding more dialog but you have to set your prima donna aspirations aside because the game is limited.  Just like you're not going to make executive decisions on how to fix the situation heroside, you're likely not going to be concocting the villainous plans yourself (mostly hijack others' plans because "early 2000s game engine").

[Ghost]

10 hours ago, Apparition said:

 

No, but a lot are.  Too many, IMO.  Excelsior has earned the nickname Freedumb Redux for a reason.  It’s why after nearly two years of playing exclusively on Excelsior, I set up shop on another shard two months ago.

 

It earned that nickname because small minded individuals see 20-30 people shout out for farms, and for some reason are not able to comprehend the fact that there are 300-400 other players NOT shouting/looking for farms.

 

I play on Excelsior 99% of the time and have never once farmed anything, and most likely I am in the majority. 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Ghost

[RageusQuitus2]

7 hours ago, Naraka said:

As for villains, why is everyone trying to be Doctor Doom?

I picture most of my villains like the brain from pinky and the brain.  Stupid heroes wont foil my plans this time!

[Hardboiled Hero]

On 5/25/2021 at 11:29 AM, Ironblade said:

I think it's underpopulated for one simple reason.  The villain content is newer than much of the blue content and has better mechanics and design.  It's just better content but it's less popular because a lot of people don't like playing the bad guy.

 

I don't think the devs should be trying to incentivize people to play content that they personally find distasteful.  The rewards should be balanced uniformly and people can decide on their own what content they prefer.  If that leaves redside a ghost town, then so be it.  We shouldn't be pressuring people to play content they would normally choose to avoid.

 

  I honestly can't see how a person could play this game and believe that redside is underpopulated because people don't want to play the villain.  Don't get me wrong, I think some people don't want to play villains.  I think some other people really do want to play villains.  I think still other people want to play whatever is appropriate to the concept of the character they're playing, and still other people just don't care about any of that hero/villain stuff and just want to run around chilling with some friends.   But to say that "red is underpopulated because people don't want to play villains" takes about 5 minutes of actual play to disprove, as you'll find many people running around atlas park using characters that they say they would rather portray as villains.

 

  I see a guy named Killa Ton running around Atlas Park, and it doesn't make me think, "wow.  That guy is really in the hero mindset".  So clearly there are people who want to play villains, but aren't.  The question then isn't one of trying to "incentivize people to play content that they personally find distasteful", rather, it's one of trying to counteract people feeling like they're being forced into content, when they would clearly prefer other content.  We don't need to make heroes into villains, we need to stop making villains into heroes.

 

 Personally, I have more than 40 characters right now.  Only one of them is a villain and one of them was made as a praetorian .  I have a widow and a soldier, both of whom I took over to the hero side as soon as I possibly could.  This is because I have a complete lack of faith in my ability to get teams on the villain side.  Honestly, I'm usually surprised by the fact that I DO see people running around in the villain starter zone..  given that in a full day of playing I might see 4 or 5 messages in the LFG chat of people asking for villain groups, I really don't expect to see any villains playing over there..  and I think this begins to point out another problem too.

 

  The problem isn't just that the villain side is underpopulated, but also that we don't know before picking our character whether we'll be able to find a team for them at that point.  I have literally spent hours in Atlas park watching the LFG channel, switching between characters only to find that a group has filled up while I was switching..  I often find myself thinking that it would be great if I could use LFG chat while I was thinking about what character I want to play, so if I see someone asking for a group that I have a character for, I could pick that character and let the person know I'm omw.  It would be useful for heroes, but it might be far more useful for Villains and Praetorians.. I just don't know if it can be done technically.

[GraspingVileTerror]

@Naraka . . . I don't know what to tell you.  You just didn't register on my radar while reviewing this thread.

But it sounds like you might be bleeding two separate but related complaints in to one particular monstrousity.

 

The "Lackey" problem is two-fold.

The specific writing in several places implies a Villain character has no agency for self-determination within the narrative conceit.

AND

The ludonarrative structure of the gameplay as it relates to Villain characters causes them to have no agency of motivation.

 

The former is a problem with "how it's being said."
The latter is a problem with "what is being said."

 

Both of these can be addressed.

 

As to why it doesn't apply to heroes . . . we come back to one of those important words:  Motivation.

Within the classic context of heroic stories, about the only motivational agency a hero is ever given is the choice to Embrace The Calling or not.

And the gameplay reinforces that choice rather haphazardly, but well enough for our purposes here.

You either do the mission, or you don't.

 

When it comes to villains, there's more nuance and flow and character development.

Remember here:  We're not playing as the villainous antagonist in some hero's story.  We are playing City of Villains to be the villainous PROTAGONIST in our own story.

THIS IS HUGE!  This seems to be something that SO MANY of the writers seem to miss out on.

Because the way things are largely written right now?  We're pigeon-holed in to being a very specific villain, and that's specifically because the writing is explicit in regards to motivation instead of leaving that in the hands of the player.

 

For a more widely analysed example, we'll take a look at another game franchise that has encapsulated this issue nicely:

Fallout

 

Fallouts 1 and 2 were great examples of a ludonarrative resonance.  

The story is set up with a distinct beginning and end, with objectives for the player to follow at their discretion to embrace or reject that story of their own free will.

And you could ABSOLUTELY play as a villain, hoo-boy!  There was villainous protagonists done right!

 

Then came along Fallout 3.

Critically acclaimed!   . . . but also:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLJ1gyIzg78

hbomberguy gets a little meandering in some places, and I don't necessarily agree with all of his conclusions, BUT it's a pretty solid video overall.

The problem with Fallout 3 is that your character's Quest and Motivation are intrinsically linked.  Your character is a "daddy's boy/girl" and you as a player have no agency to reject that.

Meanwhile, the gameplay itself offers you the freedom to play as a villain (albeit it, not nearly as thoughtfully as you could in the first two games).  The kind of character who utterly rejects the narrative motivation . . . and yet the game won't actually let you.

 

This is the dissonance.

 

This is the same dissonance that exists due to the specific writing of so many Redside arcs.

It's why players can say "the writing in Redside is great," because it is in terms of NPC characterization, humour and poignancy, and setting up compelling premises to explore.  But in the same breath these players say "it sucks," because that writing doesn't stick to landing.  Redside has a LOT of greatness to offer.  But then it never quite makes it all the way home.  It's Great!  But it Sucks.

And it's why things like the Ambition system ( https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/19762-new-redside-content-ambitions/ ) have been proposed.

Systems or story arcs which are carefully written without blundering in to the trap which (sorry to call you out in such a negative light, but) @Cobalt Arachne seems to have expressly admitted to in:  https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/28605-kallisti-wharf-level-range-everyone/?tab=comments#comment-358301

(Thread got locked before I even saw it, so I never had the appropriate venue to address the assumptions which seem to have lead to those conclusions, which I consider quite faulty.)

 

Sure.

There are players here who simply want a story told "at them."

Cool.  We'll leave the existing content for them to play.

I personally can't stand that failure in the writing.  If I'm playing a game that gives me creative freedom, I expect it to go all the way.

There's a little snide joke about Fallout 4 being the best Mass Effect game.

That's the sort of complaint I have about Redside.  And the complaint I have for the writing style which perpetuates the belief that "there's no other way."

 

Again, I'm late for work . . . blah.  

MORE ON THIS LATER!

[Snarky]

10 hours ago, GraspingVileTerror said:

I

@Snarky.

Yes.

Redside needs a PROPER social hub.

Good point.

(Gotta have SOME positivity in this post, right?)

 

I feel triggered.

 

Why didn't you talk in depth about all my madness.  All my epic villain speeches?  all my ideas to take over the world and crush my detractors beneath a incarnate empowered vampiric bootheel?  What am I to you?  Just another poster? Bah!?!

 

but, yeah, Redside needs a hub.  Redside...bestside...whatever.

[Luminara]

10 hours ago, GraspingVileTerror said:

. . . what fucking comic books have YOU been reading?  Is that ALL you've really seen?!

 

No.  But I don't expect Co* to be Ghost in the Shell, Akira, The Killing Joke, All-Star Superman, or any of my other favorites.  This game will never be ascend to that level of story-telling because it wasn't designed to be that kind of comic book super* game, it was built to reflect the basic, common super* experience of using powers to accomplish goals.  I accept it for what it is, a monthly serial focused on freeming/biffing/zonging down the bad/good guys.  If I want better story-telling, I read a book, or watch a great film, or play a different game.

[Coyotedancer]

13 hours ago, Naraka said:

Another thing I hear is "Statesman or [insert famous hero] doesn't treat you like a sidekick" which makes me chuckle.  WHO WOULDN'T WANT TO BE STATESMAN'S SIDEKICK!? 

 

 

*raises hand*

I would not want to play statesdude's sidekick.

Mostly because I just really don't like the guy. He's kind of a jerk. 😝

 

(That said, in-character my stalker Kaikara... who's arguably my Main here on Homecoming... is roleplayed as Scirocco's intern. That I'm cool with. I suspect he's a better boss than States would be.)

 

Anyway, I'm one of those people who does play red-side pretty often and I'm fond of it. There are some fun contacts and missions over there. I mean... Vernon. Come on. Who doesn't love a goofy Mad Scientist?... And I actually like some of the environments, hard-to-navigate though they may be. I like the buildings in Grandville and Saint Martial a lot more than the city-scape in Skyway, or Bricks or Peregrine Island. The northern bits of Nerva are some of my favorite landscapes in the game. I'm every bit as fond of the Oranbegan temple complex in Primeva as I am of the Shard zones or Imperial City, for instance. (There's a *reason* I based my current-time Oranbegan player-characters' cabal  around that thing, and built the whole storyline of my Ordus Chronos time travelers and their post-Battalion Wars city of Nova Primeva on that foundation. The place is a nice bit of work just to wander around and explore.)

 

I know that you can't force people to engage with any of it though, if they just don't want to. And short of turning the Isles into a copy of Paragon, you're never going to be able to address all of the concerns that people cite as to WHY they "don't want to". If you make it brighter by replacing the buildings, easier to navigate by altering the layout of the streets, easier to steamroll by replacing the current factions, more blue-ish by rewriting all of the arcs? You'll end up "fixing" the red side by pretty much destroying it as a unique thing. You'll turn CoV in to just another suburb of Paragon.

 

Maybe that's what some players want, but It would make me sad-Rogue, personally. For all its supposed warts, I like that it's as different from CoH as it is. I feel like the place having a different feel and in some cases even demanding a different play-style ia a feature rather than a bug, I guess. As an alternative, it's nice to have... Even if it's not exactly everyone and their heroic sister's box of Spiderling Scout cookies.  

[ILIWAPCT]

7 hours ago, Hardboiled Hero said:

 

  I honestly can't see how a person could play this game and believe that redside is underpopulated because people don't want to play the villain.  Don't get me wrong, I think some people don't want to play villains.  I think some other people really do want to play villains.  I think still other people want to play whatever is appropriate to the concept of the character they're playing, and still other people just don't care about any of that hero/villain stuff and just want to run around chilling with some friends.   But to say that "red is underpopulated because people don't want to play villains" takes about 5 minutes of actual play to disprove, as you'll find many people running around atlas park using characters that they say they would rather portray as villains.

 

  I see a guy named Killa Ton running around Atlas Park, and it doesn't make me think, "wow.  That guy is really in the hero mindset".  So clearly there are people who want to play villains, but aren't.  The question then isn't one of trying to "incentivize people to play content that they personally find distasteful", rather, it's one of trying to counteract people feeling like they're being forced into content, when they would clearly prefer other content.  We don't need to make heroes into villains, we need to stop making villains into heroes.

 

 Personally, I have more than 40 characters right now.  Only one of them is a villain and one of them was made as a praetorian .  I have a widow and a soldier, both of whom I took over to the hero side as soon as I possibly could.  This is because I have a complete lack of faith in my ability to get teams on the villain side.  Honestly, I'm usually surprised by the fact that I DO see people running around in the villain starter zone..  given that in a full day of playing I might see 4 or 5 messages in the LFG chat of people asking for villain groups, I really don't expect to see any villains playing over there..  and I think this begins to point out another problem too.

 

  The problem isn't just that the villain side is underpopulated, but also that we don't know before picking our character whether we'll be able to find a team for them at that point.  I have literally spent hours in Atlas park watching the LFG channel, switching between characters only to find that a group has filled up while I was switching..  I often find myself thinking that it would be great if I could use LFG chat while I was thinking about what character I want to play, so if I see someone asking for a group that I have a character for, I could pick that character and let the person know I'm omw.  It would be useful for heroes, but it might be far more useful for Villains and Praetorians.. I just don't know if it can be done technically.

My solution has to run my villains with a lacky.

 

I worry about when my alts get up to RSF level and finding a team to run the Strike Force, but lower level teams haven't been a problem. At worse instead of getting a team that day I'll probably have to advertise on the boards a week in advance or change Server then change back.  

[ILIWAPCT]

54 minutes ago, Coyotedancer said:

 

 

*raises hand*

I would not want to play statesdude's sidekick.

Mostly because I just really don't like the guy. He's kind of a jerk. 😝

 

(That said, in-character my stalker Kaikara... who's arguably my Main here on Homecoming... is roleplayed as Scirocco's intern. That I'm cool with. I suspect he's a better boss than States would be.)

 

Anyway, I'm one of those people who does play red-side pretty often and I'm fond of it. There are some fun contacts and missions over there. I mean... Vernon. Come on. Who doesn't love a goofy Mad Scientist?... And I actually like some of the environments, hard-to-navigate though they may be. I like the buildings in Grandville and Saint Martial a lot more than the city-scape in Skyway, or Bricks or Peregrine Island. The northern bits of Nerva are some of my favorite landscapes in the game. I'm every bit as fond of the Oranbegan temple complex in Primeva as I am of the Shard zones or Imperial City, for instance. (There's a *reason* I based my current-time Oranbegan player-characters' cabal  around that thing, and built the whole storyline of my Ordus Chronos time travelers and their post-Battalion Wars city of Nova Primeva on that foundation. The place is a nice bit of work just to wander around and explore.)

 

I know that you can't force people to engage with any of it though, if they just don't want to. And short of turning the Isles into a copy of Paragon, you're never going to be able to address all of the concerns that people cite as to WHY they "don't want to". If you make it brighter by replacing the buildings, easier to navigate by altering the layout of the streets, easier to steamroll by replacing the current factions, more blue-ish by rewriting all of the arcs? You'll end up "fixing" the red side by pretty much destroying it as a unique thing. You'll turn CoV in to just another suburb of Paragon.

 

Maybe that's what some players want, but It would make me sad-Rogue, personally. For all its supposed warts, I like that it's as different from CoH as it is. I feel like the place having a different feel and in some cases even demanding a different play-style ia a feature rather than a bug, I guess. As an alternative, it's nice to have... Even if it's not exactly everyone and their heroic sister's box of Spiderling Scout cookies.  

First time I tried blue was to create a Warshade and Null the Gull him Red.

Blue side is too bright. 

Felt good to be back on the Red Side, 5 minutes Blue Side is 5 minutes too long.

[Naraka]

@GraspingVileTerror, the overall point I was making was that yeah, the story of villains does fall pretty flat (some might even say it's a complete failure) but the same goes for heroes.  It's really emphasized as I caught up to on My Hero Academia since a lot of it focuses on the aspects of being a hero, from how you treat people, your overall image and how it affects citizens and other heroes alike, valuing saving lives over all, limiting collateral damage, etc.  These are ALL things you have to keep in mind when just rescuing a person having their belongings stolen.  While some of that is set aside when its time to throw down with the big-bad, that doesn't happen (throwing down with the big bad) so often than we get a pass to overlook everything else a superhero should be doing.  Overall, it fails at being a hero simulator because clicking a glowie to stop it from exploding doesn't cut it and obliterating a spawn of baddies with AoEs to rescue a civilian (who's standing next to the foes you blew up with a grenade, a fireball, etc) is pure fail.

 

I understand the intricacies of making a villain protag but the side of heroes SHOULD feel restricted because they are trying to preserve, not destroy while villains should feel the opposite.  That's a part of the "ludonarrative" (I know it's an actual term, but I still scoff at it's use.  Just express what you want to affect because complex terminology is what some would call "jargon" which usually has the opposite effect on people outside of its typical use) that likely affects things as a whole, or at least mechanically.  Just making missions heroside failable if you indiscriminately toss around AoEs when trying to rescue hostages would help but I guarantee there would be pushback.

 

59 minutes ago, Coyotedancer said:

*raises hand*

I would not want to play statesdude's sidekick.

Mostly because I just really don't like the guy. He's kind of a jerk. 😝

 

(That said, in-character my stalker Kaikara... who's arguably my Main here on Homecoming... is roleplayed as Scirocco's intern. That I'm cool with. I suspect he's a better boss than States would be.)

 

 

Well, I did add in a catch-all lol

 

My main point is that it often feels like players lack reverence.  The lore exists to give some framework and while you don't have to worship these heroes or villains, there are some who play characters that do and at worse, every player should feel some kind of gravity bearing emotion toward these pillars of the lore.  Fear, inspiration, adoration, rivalry, envy/jealousy, something.  If your character feels irritation/annoyance, pity, mentorship, superiority or some such, then you need to treat your character as a "special case".

[golstat2003]

On 5/28/2021 at 4:26 PM, Naraka said:

 

That's why I was saying "obvious obviousness aside".  The main reason I replied to your point, though, was I'm pretty sure there's someone else out there that either understands where I'm coming from or agrees but either aren't replying to this thread or don't read the forums.  I'm basically just putting my opinion out there so it is covered among the discourse.

 

That being said, I see no one objected to my point that swinging over to red doesn't require any sacrifice.  So when any of you are possibly looking for something to do and you hear someone "advertising" on red, perhaps some due diligence is required every now and then to hop on a villain character (or just gull it) to help out so their efforts aren't all for naught.

It really depends on what they are doing. A high level villain mission or sf sure. I’ll pass on low level content. If I didn’t make it clear earlier in the thread. I think it’s terrible on both sides. (And blue side having more terrible low level content is not an asset as far as I’m concerned).

[VulnaviaPhibes]

I don't know how long it's been since some of you have played villains, but the modern Kuzmin > Fire Wire or Weber > Harris path in Mercy Island definitely has you feeling like a villain. Weber betrays Arachnos to side with you, and you can murder two out of three contacts in the cold blood. You also get to be reasonable and clever, rescuing a villain to get help from them later, manipulating your contact, etc. 

 

From there you either do Bocor and the Radio or a single paper > mayhem loop and you're in Cap au Diable, where you're in a bigger pond and doing more contract/job stuff, but there's enough variety for you to reasonably pick and choose.

 

Then you're off to Sharkhead, where you're intimidating and blackmailing your own contacts again, and you've got Dean and Vincent Ross and all that good stuff, and if you want there's high-level mega villain stuff with Mr G or the Pandora's Box SSA, where you can form your own organization.

 

But City of Villains isn't about being like, Doctor Doom. City of Villains is about being like, Titania or Two-Face or the Beetle, and eventually like Circe or the Penguin. You're a crook, a con trying to make your living on the wrong side of the law. You gradually build up your rep and your resources and become a big deal, but you're a criminal, not a cosmic force of pure evil that everyone bows down to. You might strive to be that eventually, but RPGs by design involve starting in a place of weakness and slowly getting stronger.

 

A lot of supervillain tropes have their roots in like, Dillinger-Gang era criminal culture, and that's the kind of vibe CoV is trying to capture. You're like one of the ambitious young guns in an old crime movie, trying to make your living and cut your way to the top of the criminal underworld through intimidation and manipulation and guile. Dr Graves' arc rightly gets a lot of guff for characterizing the player character too specifically, but it's also a perfect look into the kind of character the developers envisioned as the "default" city of villains protagonist.

 

I like the tone of CoV as it is. 18 of my 20 characters are full-on villains. I wouldn't want to play the version of CoV some of you claim to want.

Edited May 29, 2021 by VulnaviaPhibes

[golstat2003]

2 minutes ago, VulnaviaPhibes said:

 

 

But City of Villains isn't about being like, Doctor Doom. City of Villains is about being like, Titania or Two-Face or the Beetle, and eventually like Circe or the Penguin. You're a crook, a con trying to make your living on the wrong side of the law. You gradually build up your rep and your resources and become a big deal, but you're a criminal, not a cosmic force of pure evil that everyone bows down to. You might strive to be that eventually, but RPGs by design involve starting in a place of weakness and slowly getting stronger.

 

 

I think the issue here is the narrative and folks perception of their character (and what you can build in the character creator) don’t line up. Some folks see themselves as NOT a simple common criminal.

Plus the fact with how invasive Arachnos is.

 

I agree with others that I wish Arachnos had simply been written differently instead of being so pervasive.

[VulnaviaPhibes]

1 minute ago, golstat2003 said:

I think the issue here is the narrative and folks perception of their character (and what you can build in the character creator) don’t line up. Some folks see themselves as NOT a simple common criminal.

 

That makes sense, but I feel like the developers were smart to try and shape the narrative around a specific concept (ie: super-powered criminal) instead of trying to make a narrative that works equally well if you're Catwoman or Galactus. And I think it paid off. It's not a great experience if you're playing Thanos, but it works extremely well if you're playing Taskmaster or Bullseye.

[golstat2003]

Just now, VulnaviaPhibes said:

That makes sense, but I feel like the developers were smart to try and shape the narrative around a specific concept (ie: super-powered criminal) instead of trying to make a narrative that works equally well if you're Catwoman or Galactus. And I think it paid off. It's not a great experience if you're playing Thanos, but it works extremely well if you're playing Taskmaster or Bullseye.

Ehhhh I would say the pervasiveness of Arachnos means to some that the original devs DID NOT succeed in that regard. Had they simply left Arachnos and it’s spider based motif out, that might have made the story of Red Side work better.

 

But as mmo I understand why they needed a theme like Arachnos. It made fleshing out the Rogue Isles easier. 

[VulnaviaPhibes]

I do agree that if the Rogue Isles did feel a little more lawless, and Arachnos' role in governing them was somewhat toned down, that might open up the experience a little bit more. If the rogue isles politics stories focused more on factionalism and competition rather than Arachnos' superiority, or even if Arachnos were more visibly fractious and its power over the isles required more direct enforcement instead of being ambient, this would make those stories more interesting and give them more hooks.

 

I wouldn't get rid of Arachnos though, they're my favorite part of the CoX games, easily.

 

As it is, there are plenty of ways to reject working with or outright screw over Arachnos, and until you seek their Patronage (as they are the Big Dogs on the Isles, after all) you can be hostile/avoidant very easily. and when you do get Patronage, you're a couple story arcs away from cutting off alt!Recluse's head and slapping it down on his desk. It just reinforces a theme: You're in the water with the sharks, and whether you swim in their shadow or break off on your own, you need to eat, get bigger, and not get eaten.

Edited May 29, 2021 by VulnaviaPhibes

[golstat2003]

1 hour ago, VulnaviaPhibes said:

I do agree that if the Rogue Isles did feel a little more lawless, and Arachnos' role in governing them was somewhat toned down, that might open up the experience a little bit more. If the rogue isles politics stories focused more on factionalism and competition rather than Arachnos' superiority, or even if Arachnos were more visibly fractious and its power over the isles required more direct enforcement instead of being ambient, this would make those stories more interesting and give them more hooks.

 

I wouldn't get rid of Arachnos though, they're my favorite part of the CoX games, easily.

 

As it is, there are plenty of ways to reject working with or outright screw over Arachnos, and until you seek their Patronage (as they are the Big Dogs on the Isles, after all) you can be hostile/avoidant very easily. and when you do get Patronage, you're a couple story arcs away from cutting off alt!Recluse's head and slapping it down on his desk. It just reinforces a theme: You're in the water with the sharks, and whether you swim in their shadow or break off on your own, you need to eat, get bigger, and not get eaten.

 

Hmmm I see it slightly differently but won't argue with you. I'll just say on my pure Villians I always avoided the patrons for the level 40+ powers, when that became an option.

[Christopher Robin]

On 5/28/2021 at 12:27 PM, RageusQuitus2 said:

Beg to differ.  Some time ago RaqeusQuitus was voted by the vast majority as their rep on the forums.  So when Rageus talks, he has the might of the vast majority behind him.

 

So if I read you right you speak for the vast majority and you wish to beg, very well I accept.

[VulnaviaPhibes]

I will say that a lot of debate on this topic seems extremely stuck in the past, which is to be expected given how long it's been going on.

 

The problem isn't a lack of dedicated "redside" players. Everyone's in the same world, and we can change alignment with the push of a button!

 

The problem people have actually identified is that it's difficult to find groups to do villain content with, compared to hero content. 

 

Villain content is on average better written and generally more story-focused than hero content, and that's part of the problem. You're more likely to want to take it slow with a small group and roleplay a little than rush through the missions with a big group and not read anything, or level too fast and miss your favorite story arc or zone. Praetoria has this same situation but more so. Rapidly leveling and rushing through in big teams kind of ruins the point. There is villain content designed for big teams, but it's the exception, not the rule.

 

As supporting evidence for this: Everlasting. it's the unofficial RP server and as far as I know has the largest villain population of all of Homecoming's servers. I'm almost exclusively on Everlasting and I rarely have trouble finding a villain team, and they're often in-character teams as well.

[MTeague]

9 hours ago, Naraka said:

 Just making missions heroside failable if you indiscriminately toss around AoEs when trying to rescue hostages would help but I guarantee there would be pushback.

Personally, I would love this, though you are correct, there would be much wailing and gnashing of teeth that it kills "playability", and "nerfs fun".

 

But, in the spirit of Balance, some Villain missions would also need to be failable if you toss mass amounts of AoE damage and destroy the computers instead of download the files, kill your kidnappee instead of preserve them, or blow up the Prototype Widget that you're trying to steal.