Option to include @Global in Chat

[UltraAlt]

1 hour ago, mistagoat said:

Here is how I see this being very useful.

@Starhammer

 

Back before the Fall of the City and the subsequent Sundown, I was in a group called the Repeat Offenders.

Maybe some of you from back then heard of them.

 

The Repeat Offenders was a multi-supergroup mult-server gaming group.

Players organized through the Repeat Offenders global channel. (anyone can create a global channel)

Set Supergroups ran on set nights at set times. Players meet up through the global and then characters assembled at specific location on that supergroups server.  Supergroups were generally limited to 8  - or so it seemed to me.

If  players wasn't actively running with a supergroup when they were on, they could use the Repeat Offenders' global channel to recruit.

I often jumped servers to team up with other members of the Repeat Offenders on whatever server they were recruiting for. (Like now, I had characters on every server)

 

That system seemed to work pretty smoothly to me.

Sure there is a limit as to how many could be in the global channel (I recall it being 250 something). I don't think that the number of channel users ever became an issue.

 

If you are all on the same server, you can get way more characters into 5 supergroups than into a global channel and coalition the 5 supergroups together - and use coalition chat.

Players want individual bases? No problem. They can keep at least one character in one of the coalition-ed  supergroups and one in their personal supergroup and /altinvite characters back and forth all that they please.

 

I don't see a reason for the suggested system. I don't think the CoH program can handle it and/or it would be too complicated for the DEVs to implement.

If the suggested system was added to the game, I would never use it. I do use coalition chat from time to time. (I'm not currently part of any global chat channels)

I stated why I wouldn't use the proposed change/addition in my first post in this thread.

 

I strongly suggest try using the communication systems already built into the game, and then come back with information about the issues with using those systems before trying to add a new feature to the game that those already existing communication options most likely can handle.

[mistagoat]

13 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

I don't see a reason for the suggested system.

A quick, simple, at-a-glance way to identify good teammates advertising in broadcast, local or LFG with whom you've previously played.

 

There is nothing wrong with the system you suggest, however it's a bit cumbersome and certainly does not fill the quick, simple, at-a-glance role. I think every reasonable suggestion has included a stipulation that this all be optional or be something you have to opt-in to, as such I don't see a downside. If one would like nothing at all to change for them, simply don't select the options that would enable it and continue your virtual crime stopping blissfully unencumbered by these potential options. Options are wonderful and I'd love to have more!

 

[UltraAlt]

1 hour ago, mistagoat said:

A quick, simple, at-a-glance way to identify good teammates advertising in broadcast, local or LFG with whom you've previously played.

 

I have already pointed out the systems that are in game to communicate with people that you have previously gamed by utilizing systems already in the game - that is if they want to take part in that communication. You can be a member of all the global channels that you want to be part of.

 

This is extra work for the DEVs because you don't want to use the existing systems.

 

1 hour ago, mistagoat said:

There is nothing wrong with the system you suggest, however it's a bit cumbersome and certainly does not fill the quick, simple, at-a-glance role.

 

What?

Like that invention system?

The incarnate system?

 

It isn't cumbersome at all if you have even tried it.

Have you?

 

1 hour ago, mistagoat said:

I don't see a downside

 

The downside is the DEVs time, how complicate it may be to implement (if at all based on CoH's coding), and what possible crashing issues and additional lag it may cause.

[mistagoat]

12 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

 

I have already pointed out

And I have already pointed out why this would be more streamlined. I don't think we are getting anywhere so I will simply wish you a wonderful day and say goodbye.

[Oklahoman]

52 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

The downside is the DEVs time, how complicate it may be to implement (if at all based on CoH's coding), and what possible crashing issues and additional lag it may cause.

 

Not just here but in this entire forum, we have got to stop assuming what the devs are capable of. We can't simultaneously sing the devs praises with each new update, then assume they are absolutely incapable of making a suggestion mentioned here work.

[Rudra]

5 hours ago, mistagoat said:

Here is how I see this being very useful. Lets say Goddess Laucianna makes a new toon, shes a level 18 blaster named Betty Blaster and she is advertising a posi pt2 on the LFG channel. I'm just running solo radios in Bricks on a lvl 35 tank not necessarily looking for a Posi pt2. If I see Betty Blaster advertise I may not be enticed to leave my radios to play with an unknown variable. However if I saw Betty Blaster (@Laucianna) advertise in the LFG channel then I already know that leader is someone I've played with before and I have a reasonable idea of what to expect and that may get me to bail on my radio and go join her Posi pt2.

And here is the problem I have with this post. If you are interested in the advertised TF/SF, then you should be willing to join said TF/SF unless you know the person advertising is someone you did not previously enjoy being with. Otherwise, you are excluding a lot of potentially great leaders that you would enjoy playing with just because that person is not someone you already know you enjoy playing with. So while I am not against the OP as long as it is an option that must be turned on, not turned off from default on, I very much disagree with the reasoning you provided.

[Oklahoman]

4 minutes ago, Rudra said:

And here is the problem I have with this post. If you are interested in the advertised TF/SF, then you should be willing to join said TF/SF unless you know the person advertising is someone you did not previously enjoy being with.

 

I've had a lot of people join my TPN badge runs lately who said they've never done one before, and are only doing it because they've enjoyed running with me on other things. It can be a way for players to try something new.

 

Conversely, I may be quite interested in joining a POSI but because I enabled the setting to show their global name in chat I can tell it's being organized by someone I had a negative experience with recently (while they were on an alt), I might choose not to.

 

I am all for an option to show globals in chat that is defaulted to off, like timestamps and character name colors. I am against an option that let's you define how my chat looks - whether it's a setting you can turn on that forces timestamps for your chat to not show up on my end, defining your preferred color for a chat name, disabling my ability to log any of your chats, or hiding your global in my chat.

[Rudra]

2 minutes ago, Oklahoman said:

 

I've had a lot of people join my TPN badge runs lately who said they've never done one before, and are only doing it because they've enjoyed running with me on other things. It can be a way for players to try something new.

 

Conversely, I may be quite interested in joining a POSI but because I enabled the setting to show their global name in chat I can tell it's being organized by someone I had a negative experience with recently (while they were on an alt), I might choose not to.

 

I am all for an option to show globals in chat that is defaulted to off, like timestamps and character name colors. I am against an option that let's you define how my chat looks - whether it's a setting you can turn on that forces timestamps for your chat to not show up on my end, defining your preferred color for a chat name, disabling my ability to log any of your chats, or hiding your global in my chat.

I think you are misunderstanding the point of my comment. As I said, I am not against the OP. (As long as it is an opt in option.) I'm not even against people using globals as a means of screening who they play with. If you enjoy playing with people, play with them. If you don't, then don't. What I have a problem with is the ignoring people you don't know for doing something you are interested in doing because it is someone you don't know. Give others a chance. (And by you, I don't mean you specifically. It is the generic you.)

[Oklahoman]

2 minutes ago, Rudra said:

What I have a problem with is the ignoring people you don't know for doing something you are interested in doing because it is someone you don't know. Give others a chance. (And by you, I don't mean you specifically. It is the generic you.)

 

I don't disagree with this. Not long ago there was a guy really wanting to get the REALLY HARD WAY badge, and he had absolutely no clue what he was doing. I, and several other regular league leaders, joined him on 2 or 3 runs. We gave him a try, and I think others should, too - it's possible he could have tried a novel solution the rest of would have liked to have learned. The end of that story is I got him to join me over on Everlasting for a run, where they have it down solid, and he got his badge.

 

But, if that same guy decided to try again under an alt, I'd rather skip it. REALLY HARD WAY can be an expensive attempt. And if I could see his global in the chat, I would.

[Frozen Burn]

Regarding anonymity.... it really isn't there as anyone can click on your name and get your global.  Because it's an extra step to get that info, it gives a false sense of anonymity and comfort.  I know this as I too like not having my global name plastered out there (introvert here), but I realize that anyone can access it if they so choose by clicking on my character name. 

 

I am against forcing us to view each other's global names outright - if there is an option to turn that on for those who wish it, that is fine - as the info is already available freely just by clicking on a name in chat.

 

I personally HATE when people use the chat binds to add their global name to their character name in chat because it's just so dang loooooong.  It takes up and entire line or line-and-a-half of chat just to state who they are.  It's SOOOO darn annoying.  

 

So, I would be okay with an option for it as long as the default is OFF and those who want it can turn it ON.  

[mistagoat]

10 minutes ago, Rudra said:

I think you are misunderstanding the point of my comment. As I said, I am not against the OP. (As long as it is an opt in option.) I'm not even against people using globals as a means of screening who they play with. If you enjoy playing with people, play with them. If you don't, then don't. What I have a problem with is the ignoring people you don't know for doing something you are interested in doing because it is someone you don't know. Give others a chance. (And by you, I don't mean you specifically. It is the generic you.)

My apologies, my scenario must have been unclear. In that scenario, my lvl 35 tank was not actively looking for a posi and was perfectly happy to continue doing my radios solo. It was only the lure of joining a team led by an individual with whom I've had positive experiences in the past that got me to leave my hypothetical radio. No exclusion or ignoring of anyone involved.

 

For the record, if I were actively looking for a Posi, I'd most likely start my own and invite the first 7 tells I got or I'd jump on the first one I saw advertised. 

[UltraAlt]

10 hours ago, mistagoat said:

And I have already pointed out why this would be more streamlined. I don't think we are getting anywhere so I will simply wish you a wonderful day and say goodbye.

 

Agreed. have a good one.

[Excraft]

20 hours ago, Oklahoman said:

Not just here but in this entire forum, we have got to stop assuming what the devs are capable of. We can't simultaneously sing the devs praises with each new update, then assume they are absolutely incapable of making a suggestion mentioned here work.

 

Thank you for saying this.  I'd like to add that it should be up to the HC folks to determine what is or isn't a waste of their time.  They're smart people, they can make those decisions on their own.

[PeregrineFalcon]

You know, I've seen more than one post in this thread, and multiple posts in other threads over the years about being stalked and/or harassed.

 

I've been on the internet since 1996 and I've never had anyone stalk and/or harass me. Maybe they tried and I didn't notice because I ignored them once they started annoying me? I don't know. But it just seems weird to me that my experience on the internet can be so wildly different from the norm. You all are constantly being stalked and/or harassed. Meanwhile I'm over here just enjoying my time on the internet. It's like TV but better because I get to interact with the stuff on the magic screen.

 

Serious question: why is my experience on the internet so wildly different from the norm?

[Rudra]

1 hour ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

You know, I've seen more than one post in this thread, and multiple posts in other threads over the years about being stalked and/or harassed.

 

I've been on the internet since 1996 and I've never had anyone stalk and/or harass me. Maybe they tried and I didn't notice because I ignored them once they started annoying me? I don't know. But it just seems weird to me that my experience on the internet can be so wildly different from the norm. You all are constantly being stalked and/or harassed. Meanwhile I'm over here just enjoying my time on the internet. It's like TV but better because I get to interact with the stuff on the magic screen.

 

Serious question: why is my experience on the internet so wildly different from the norm?

Maybe they're scared you're going to serve them with a side of greens to the next person foolish enough to stalk you?

[Shin Magmus]

1 hour ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

You know, I've seen more than one post in this thread, and multiple posts in other threads over the years about being stalked and/or harassed.

 

I've been on the internet since 1996 and I've never had anyone stalk and/or harass me. Maybe they tried and I didn't notice because I ignored them once they started annoying me? I don't know. But it just seems weird to me that my experience on the internet can be so wildly different from the norm. You all are constantly being stalked and/or harassed. Meanwhile I'm over here just enjoying my time on the internet. It's like TV but better because I get to interact with the stuff on the magic screen.

 

Serious question: why is my experience on the internet so wildly different from the norm?

"He doesn't know that I'm stalking him!  I'm getting away with it!"

[Luminara]

1 hour ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Serious question: why is my experience on the internet so wildly different from the norm?

 

People stalk/harass those they consider weaker than themselves.  They attack bunnies, not bears.

[Oklahoman]

1 hour ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Serious question: why is my experience on the internet so wildly different from the norm?

 

Specific to COH, I don't think your experience is wildly different from the norm. I've had a few stalk me in COH, but I've put them on ignore and move on with life. I really have no social media presence outside of the tiny one in I have in Discord. There's one other social media platform I use regularly, and I never post there "Hey, find me in City of Heroes @Oklahoman!" so there's no link between that account and my COH account. There are 3-4 people who play the game and have known me in real life, so it's a bit jarring when they call me by my real name in game, but I've seen them all in tights so there's the threat of mutually assured destruction there that keeps us in line. Other than that there's a small handful of people in game who know what I do for a living, and specifically what town I live in, otherwise I enjoy keeping those parts of my life separate. Makes it a little harder to stalk me outside the game, I think.

 

Though, I think most people know what state I live in.

[PeregrineFalcon]

2 minutes ago, Luminara said:

People stalk/harass those they consider weaker than themselves.  They attack bunnies, not bears.

So basically I'm such a meanie that I scare the stalkers away without even realizing it?

 

Well, you all have to deal with stalkers and I have to deal with mods. I think I got the better end of the deal. At least mods occasionally listen to reason.

[lemming]

2 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Serious question: why is my experience on the internet so wildly different from the norm?

You're a guy (or at least come across that way) which cuts down a bit on stalking.   I have a few friends that have had issues, I worked in security for a bit,  and when I was a mod elsewhere I came down pretty hard on someone who had been a creep to a younger female player, so it's out there.

[Luminara]

6 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

So basically I'm such a meanie that I scare the stalkers away without even realizing it?

 

No.

 

Stalking/harassment is predatory behavior.  Predators don't seek out strong prey unless they're working with others (a pack) or desperate (ill, injured or starving).  Online, people engaging in this type of predation look for people who are, or who appear to be, submissive; people who can be frightened into compliance; or people who can be manipulated with the threat of social censure ("i'll make you look like a horrible person in front of everyone").

 

You don't fit the prey model this kind of predator hunts.  Most people online these days have been trained to behave, to walk away from an instigator, to call a nanny cop when someone's trying to get under their skin, to be afraid of retaliating because they might be nailed by the nanny cops or look bad in front of their friends, to be submissive.  Don't escalate, don't retaliate, don't engage, just bend over and take it and someone will be along with some Anal Eze shortly.  You're aggressive, unlikely to be cowed, and not overly concerned with your reputation or appearance.  Whether you're "mean" is irrelevant, it's a question of whether you're a good target, and you simply aren't.

 

[Laucianna]

Maybe lets get back onto the topic of the suggestion? I am still fully for it as long as it is a toggle on option and if the devs want to add it ❤️ 

[PeregrineFalcon]

9 minutes ago, Laucianna said:

Maybe lets get back onto the topic of the suggestion? I am still fully for it as long as it is a toggle on option and if the devs want to add it ❤️ 

Hey shut up! Luminara's saying nice things about me, for a change. 😁

 

Ok, back on topic. I don't really care if this is implemented or not. I do however suspect that the OP's actual reason for wanting this is as a first step to trying to get the devs to allow names to no longer be unique by allowing the global@charactername method, as discussed in the most recent name release thread.

[Haijinx]

Oh this debate is over 25 years old now! 

 

Obviously we will solve it on some small semi-private MMO forum!

[Luminara]

2 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Luminara's saying nice things about me, for a change. 😁

 

...

 

Fart face.