Any news on phase 2 of naming policy?

[MHertz]

14 hours ago, UltraAlt said:

It used to be a badge of achievement to get to level 50

It also used to be a badge of honor to have a 50 on your account at all, in light of the limited number of slots you got. With 1,000 slots per server, it only exacerbates the name camping problem and without much benefit to the person doing the hoarding. Who cares if someone has 300 50s that they don’t play?

[MHertz]

9 hours ago, Excraft said:

Seems very funny that the people here who promote and encourage (and enforce) creativity and "originality" are the same people who can't be bothered to be creative

Citation needed.

 

I have never, ever said I had a problem creating new character names. Even on Live, it was a simple matter. There has never been a case when I said, “I really need this name, and I’m willing to push the other user in order to get it.” I have also never claimed that a name purge would be good for me personally.

 

My argument is against using sentimentality and anecdote and perceived benefit to decide on name policy. A balance has to be struck between giving a good experience to new players with no banked character names; casual players who only play infrequently; and current players who have names they feel ownership of. Trying to shift the burden off of one group and onto the others is not a solution for the long-term game population. Give new players a bad experience and frustration at the character creation step, and you have no fresh blood. Squeeze out casual players and they won’t come back. Dump on the current players and they’ll bail. Whatever rules that emerge should be reasonable and clear and easy to implement, and I think they are.

[UltraAlt]

1 hour ago, MHertz said:

Who cares if someone has 300 50s that they don’t play?

 

I do if they don't have to log in to play their character once a year to keep their name, and I have to log my characters in once a year because I don't want to play the end-game.

 

If it is a name release policy, make the 50's log in like everyone else.

[UltraAlt]

15 hours ago, lemming said:

I think making an assumption that most 50s were PL'd isn't helping your argument.

 

No. I don't have the numbers to prove it. And I doubt the DEVs keep track of how many characters made it to level 50 within 5 or so hours (I'm sure some less than that!)

It is an assumption on my part.

It would be nice if it could be confirmed that it is true.

The rate that I see people asking for doorsitters and people asking for doorsiting positions, it seems pretty clear what is going on.

I also see how people say that once they get their first 50 that they powerlevel the rest of their characters, so there is evidence of it going on.

 

15 hours ago, lemming said:

And I agree that 50s should be subject to a timer.

 

Thanks for this at least.

[UltraAlt]

3 hours ago, lemming said:

As predicted.   I think that behaviour will definitely be done.

 

Yes. Some will cheat the system any way that they can.

And this is exactly why there will be a rush to powerlevel characters to 50 in order to keep names if the name release policy allows 50's to keep their names without having to log in to the character ... ever.

[Captain Fabulous]

7 hours ago, ZemX said:

 

I've said as much, which you would know if you had actually read any of my posts carefully.  Though I do find it interesting how many times people reach for this "I'm allowed to" bullshit response whenever they get pushback.  You are being disagreed with.  Nobody has said you can't have the opinion.  Yet, of course, you construct that strawman again because you've got nothing better, it seems.

 

 

I'm sure you don't appreciate the irony but you are misrepresenting what I wrote just there WHILE complaining about it.   It's not okay to misrepresent someone else's arguments whether it's being done to you... or by you.  

 

You are either simply trolling at this point... or you just don't have the capacity for a reasoned argument. So I'll just collect one more childish down-vote from you, if you don't mind, and then I'm done wasting my time on you.

This is why I stopped replying. I got tired of the never-ending strawmen, logical fallacies, and false equivalencies. It was obvious (to me at least) that some people have a vested interest in protecting all their inactive characters and will freely engage in disingenuous discourse. If I were a bettin' man I'd say they're campers sitting on hundreds or even thousands of names they don't want to lose, which would explain why they continue to be blatantly obtuse.

[Luminara]

I wonder how many names we have that other people had on the original servers.  All of this bickering over inactive accounts, power-leveled this and that, name hoarding, not getting "your" name... how many of us have names that were used by others on the original servers?  How many of us have more characters than we can actively play, even if we rotate through them with some regularity?  I haven't seen anyone raise a hand and say, "I'll give up my favorite name if the original user wants it back."

 

Maybe the name release policy should be more aggressive.  Maybe it should hit active players more strongly than inactive players, since it's the active players who are most determined to hold on to names, come hell or high water.  Or maybe there shouldn't be a policy at all, maybe the responsibility for solving this should rest on our shoulders, not the HC team's, since we're as much a part of the problem as the inactive players.

 

And maybe all of this is meaningless, since they're just names.  Intangible strings of alphanumeric characters attached to texture-mapped polygonal digital avatars that make pretty lights and noises.  They aren't food.  They aren't land.   They aren't chiffon-lace silk panties, so maybe getting your panties in a bunch over it is pointless.  The world's going to keep spinning, no matter what happens, no matter who has which name.

[Biff Pow]

I'm constantly surprised by some of the names available on the lesser played servers. I hope the name release gets implemented eventually, but in the meantime try out Torchbearer or Indomitable.

[Oubliette_Red]

47 minutes ago, Supertanker said:

I'm constantly surprised by some of the names available on the lesser played servers. I hope the name release gets implemented eventually, but in the meantime try out Torchbearer or Indomitable.

 

Actually, since Torch was the first server, the odds are high that a fair amount of characters were made there prior to the other servers coming up.

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Oubliette_Red

[MHertz]

4 hours ago, UltraAlt said:

If it is a name release policy, make the 50's log in like everyone else.

I agree with you. I think you missed the point of my previous post.

 

What I said was “who cares if someone has 300 50s that they don’t play?” But the context is “we have so many slots available, there is no opportunity cost to hoarding idle names.”

[UltraAlt]

21 minutes ago, MHertz said:

What I said was “who cares if someone has 300 50s that they don’t play?” But the context is “we have so many slots available, there is no opportunity cost to hoarding idle names.”

 

And I answered that for me.

However, any player(s) that want a name release policy should be concerned about a someone hoarding names by having 300 level 50 ... because, currently, those 300 hoarded name would be immune to the name release policy simply because they are level 50.

 

I'm even going to go out on the limb here (but it seems pretty strong), that the more level 50's someone has, the more likely it is that they are power-leveling them to 50 ... and the more likely that they are power-leveling them just to hoard names.

[Someone that has a special name that they consider to be their own are going to take the time to log the character regardless]

 

I don't understand your term "no opportunity cost".

[Mopery]

 

[Mjolnerd]

1 hour ago, UltraAlt said:

I don't understand your term "no opportunity cost".

 

Opportunity cost is the value of what you lose when you choose from two or more alternatives. It’s a core concept for both investing and life in general.

 

Basically, it's what you're giving up in order to get something. For example, if you're about to log off for the night and go to bed, but then you see someone advertising an ITF, the opportunity cost of joining it is the sleep you won't be getting because you'll be up late playing City of Heroes instead.

 

Back on Live, the opportunity cost of having any given name was that you wouldn't have access to that character slot for other names/alts -- when you only had between 12 and 36 slots (depending whether you'd paid extra for additional slots) per server, per paid account, that opportunity cost was relatively high. Now, with 1000 slots per server and the ability to make as many accounts as you want for free, the opportunity cost of holding any given name is... well, not technically zero, but negligible. You're basically giving up nothing to have the name -- thus, there's no real incentive not to squat on any name you can get, forever.

 

It's a similar theory to the one behind the Shopping Cart Test; everyone agrees that returning your cart when you're done shopping is the right thing to do, but because there's no direct, immediate personal benefit to doing so, and there are no negative personal consequences for not doing so, many people simply won't bother. (Obviously there are sometimes extenuating circumstances that prevent someone from returning their cart, but it's meant as a generalization -- remove those roadblocks and some people still won't do it.) It's therefore seen as a good litmus test for whether a person is capable of self-governance and/or how much regard they have for others.

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Mjolnerd

[Captain Fabulous]

30 minutes ago, Mjolnerd said:

 

Opportunity cost is the value of what you lose when you choose from two or more alternatives. It’s a core concept for both investing and life in general.

 

Basically, it's what you're giving up in order to get something. For example, if you're about to log off for the night and go to bed, but then you see someone advertising an ITF, the opportunity cost of joining it is the sleep you won't be getting because you'll be up late playing City of Heroes instead.

 

Back on Live, the opportunity cost of having any given name was that you wouldn't have access to that character slot for other names/alts -- when you only had between 12 and 36 slots (depending whether you'd paid extra for additional slots) per server, per paid account, that opportunity cost was relatively high. Now, with 1000 slots per server and the ability to make as many accounts as you want for free, the opportunity cost of holding any given name is... well, not technically zero, but negligible. You're basically giving up nothing to have the name -- thus, there's no real incentive not to squat on any name you can get, forever.

 

It's a similar theory to the one behind the Shopping Cart Test; everyone agrees that returning your cart when you're done shopping is the right thing to do, but because there's no direct, immediate personal benefit to doing so, and there are no negative personal consequences for not doing so, many people simply won't bother. (Obviously there are sometimes extenuating circumstances that prevent someone from returning their cart, but it's meant as a generalization -- remove those roadblocks and some people still won't do it.) It's therefore seen as a good litmus test for whether a person is capable of self-governance and/or how much regard they have for others.

 

Hallmarks of narcissistic personality disorder.

[UltraAlt]

12 minutes ago, Mjolnerd said:

Now, with 1000 slots per server and the ability to make as many accounts as you want for free, the opportunity cost of holding any given name is... well, not technically zero, but negligible. You're basically giving up nothing to have the name. Thus, there's no real incentive not to squat on any name you want, for as long as you want.

 

I agree.

 

Again.

I have no issue with the name release policy itself. I honestly don't care either way.

However, if my characters have to be logged in every 365 days in order to keep the name (most of them not being level 50), then I think all level 50's should have to be logged in at least once year to keep that name.

 

When people were paying a subscription for accounts I could understand some level of entitlement to a name of a character that a person leveled up to 50 ....before the AE was released.

Once the AE was released, everyone that was around back then - especially when F2P was released, know how all the AE babies started showing up - showing quite clearly how easy it was to doorsit to 50 because it requires no knowledge or commitment to the game to doorsit to level 50.

 

So, again, my stance is that if characters need to be active to retain their name up to level 49, that those characters above level 50 should not be immune to the same process. The purpose is to release names and, thus, someone that has level 50 characters are squatting/hoarding names just as much as much as a level 49 or below and should be treated the same. That is to say, they should have to log in to retain their name the same as everyone else.

 

Simply put, the easy and fastest way to 50 is by AFK doorsit power-leveling. If a level 50 character is immune to the renaming process then AFK doorsit power-leveling is the easiest and fastest to gain that immunity. Any one that "really wants" a name is more likely to immediately AFK doorsit power-level to 50 once the system goes live.

 

I do not believe that players deserve the immunity because they AFK doorsit power-leveled a character.

 

Does that mean I believe that all 50's were power leveled? No.

Does that mean that I think those that played their characters to level 50 should be punished? No. I don't think that requiring players to log in level 50 characters to retain that character name is any more of a punishment then making players log into their level 49 and below characters in order to achieve the same thing - name retention.

 

But, also, yes. Based on your definition of "opportunity cost". It isn't worth me taking the time stating the same points over and over again to people that can't understand.

I have defended my point, my stance, and my opinion.

[Mjolnerd]

7 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

However, if my characters have to be logged in every 365 days in order to keep the name (most of them not being level 50), then I think all level 50's should have to be logged in at least once year to keep that name.

 

...

 

But, also, yes. Based on your definition of "opportunity cost". It isn't worth me taking the time stating the same points over and over again to people that can't understand.

I have defended my point, my stance, and my opinion.

 

It's not my definition, I lifted it word-for-word from Forbes.

 

More importantly, I agree with you regarding 50s -- there's no practical reason the rules shouldn't apply to a particular character just because that character reached the highest number it can. But as I already said upthread, I don't feel so vehemently about that, that I'm going to get upset over it. If it were up to me, 50s wouldn't be immune. But it's not, so... shrugging emoji.

[GM Crumpet]

I farm and play. I don't farm to get as many 50's as possible, I farm maybe once a month or longer if I have an alt that's struggling at lower levels and I want to get to a power tier that will help, or past content I'm bored with. Most alts have been played properly and once I get to tier 4 on all the incarnate stuff I move them to their own column and retire them. The only reason some of them have been logged in since they were retired 2+ years ago is to get the PaPs last Halloween. Otherwise they are not played. It doesn't mean I don't love them, and it doesn't mean I haven't sweated over keeping them alive and sworn like a sailor when I've done something stupid. So far I'm up to 21 retired level 50's and the number creeps up slowly. I have 2 more I'm working on that only need a few components to be complete, and maybe 6 that are 50 but are low vet level.

 

The chances are their names are going to be in demand. I know this because I've seen others with the same name on other shards. The chances are also high that I probably will forget to log them in eventually and lose the names. I'd prefer that didn't happen. A lot of people retire their 50's and the farming to 50 discussion aside we tend to move on to other alts. I have probably a dozen or so at levels ranging from pre-10 to mid-40's. Those get played for a few days or weeks then I move on to a different one. The chances of losing those names is small. The retired 50's though, they are at risk simply because I've moved on. 

 

Personally (and taking off my GM hat for a minute) I think it's a reasonable compromise. You can argue people have reduced the cachet of having an incarnated level 50 with farming, but people play how they play and if they are having fun and it's not hurting anyone else then that's their choice. I play how I play, which is mostly solo but team for the occasional iTrial or raid, and I'm not hurting anyone either. Alts under level 50 that get played at least occasionally will be safe. Level 50's will always be safe. Those 300 level 1's you made because you didn't want anyone else to have that name and will never use aren't safe. If you want to keep them you'll have to log them in very regularly, and that's going to get old very quickly.

Getting to 50 even without farming isn't that hard now. With double XP, recipes, salvage, enhancements etc being reasonably priced, and purples being really common you can totally buff your character way past the difficulty. On live it was hard as most people couldn't afford more than a set or two. Now everyone can have as many purple recipes as they wish and can frankenbuild to the last fraction of a percent. People can work towards a build instead of just dreaming of it. We aren't stuck with 10 alts and that's all we get. 
 

[Bionic_Flea]

10 hours ago, Luminara said:

They aren't chiffon-lace silk panties . . .

Well, then what kind of panties are they?

[Mopery]

You'll have a thousand people who all feel they are entitled to a popular name, let's say "Death". You'd better believe that they're each the "original owner", that they'll use it better than anyone else including you so just give them the name they want...

 

Why would anyone want such a name in the first place?

 

The best names I've seen are originals, probably made because a player couldn't get the name they really wanted so instead they created a new name for their hero/villain, and it's often an awesome name which has not existed before.

[InvaderStych]

(Edit: Most of ...) ... this thread is a complete embarrassment to our community.

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by InvaderStych
Close it.

[Seed22]

19 hours ago, MHertz said:

It used to be a badge of achievement to get to level 50

I just have to ask though: Why?

 

I mean it was an achievement to who? You personally? If so then that's perfectly reasonable! But even then, why does it matter how you got them? Makes me think folks with more free-time than others will get them 'the natural way' more often. I don't, so I have to rely on PL'ing. Others? I can't speak about or for. Is there a literal RL cash prize for having 50's "the right way"(no such thing) that I'm missing out on here? If so, I'll switch back to *shudders* having to PuG to 50.

 

I don't understand what this badge provides, either. Khelds unlock got moved from 50->20->none, and same for VEATs, so there's no real badge to it anymore. All's to say it really is just a game at the end of the day, so I doubt(moreso hope) no one here cares this much about being 50 or how one goes about getting a 50.

Edited February 23, 2023 by Seed22

[Captain Fabulous]

4 minutes ago, Seed22 said:

I just have to ask though: Why?

Because in the early days, prior to the various methods of powerleveling, it took quite a bit of time and effort to get there. It was a very different game back then.

[Seed22]

18 minutes ago, Captain Fabulous said:

Because in the early days, prior to the various methods of powerleveling, it took quite a bit of time and effort to get there. It was a very different game back then.

I played during that time, from i6 onward. I think my first 50 back then was a NB/Regen stalker, which was neat for sure! But what I really want to know is why does it matter now how folks get 50s given how easy it is? If that makes a bit more sense?

[Erratic1]

8 hours ago, GM Crumpet said:

I farm and play. I don't farm to get as many 50's as possible, I farm maybe once a month or longer if I have an alt that's struggling at lower levels and I want to get to a power tier that will help, or past content I'm bored with. Most alts have been played properly and once I get to tier 4 on all the incarnate stuff I move them to their own column and retire them. The only reason some of them have been logged in since they were retired 2+ years ago is to get the PaPs last Halloween. Otherwise they are not played. It doesn't mean I don't love them, and it doesn't mean I haven't sweated over keeping them alive and sworn like a sailor when I've done something stupid. So far I'm up to 21 retired level 50's and the number creeps up slowly. I have 2 more I'm working on that only need a few components to be complete, and maybe 6 that are 50 but are low vet level.

 

The chances are their names are going to be in demand. I know this because I've seen others with the same name on other shards. The chances are also high that I probably will forget to log them in eventually and lose the names. I'd prefer that didn't happen. A lot of people retire their 50's and the farming to 50 discussion aside we tend to move on to other alts. I have probably a dozen or so at levels ranging from pre-10 to mid-40's. Those get played for a few days or weeks then I move on to a different one. The chances of losing those names is small. The retired 50's though, they are at risk simply because I've moved on. 

 

Personally (and taking off my GM hat for a minute) I think it's a reasonable compromise. You can argue people have reduced the cachet of having an incarnated level 50 with farming, but people play how they play and if they are having fun and it's not hurting anyone else then that's their choice. I play how I play, which is mostly solo but team for the occasional iTrial or raid, and I'm not hurting anyone either. Alts under level 50 that get played at least occasionally will be safe. Level 50's will always be safe. Those 300 level 1's you made because you didn't want anyone else to have that name and will never use aren't safe. If you want to keep them you'll have to log them in very regularly, and that's going to get old very quickly.

 

It is almost a shame there is no, "Retired" setting we can give characters which would:

• Flag them as Emeritus and give make an, "Emeritus" title available.
• Track ownership to the player by some unique value.
• Release the original name back to the pool for use (since the character now tracks to the player invisibly).
• Make it so they can only be logged in and played while they have rest xp (no point in being retired if you are not retired). 

So, @FrequentAltMaker levels her character Face Puncher to 50, retires the character, and thereafter can display Emeritus in her title and play the character infrequently.  @NedNewbie decides to make a character named Face Puncher and delights to find the name available. At some point he might even retire the character. 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Erratic1

[ZemX]

7 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

At some point he might even retire the character. 

 

... and is then upset that "Face Puncher Emeritus" is taken?!

 

I'll show myself out... 🤪