Cottage Rule

[Go0gleplex]

On 6/7/2025 at 12:34 PM, Octogoat said:

But-but a tiny cottage at my feet would be cute!

 

IT'S A MIMIC! KILL IT! ><   

 

(chuckles)

[MTeague]

25 minutes ago, Troo said:

Lame

 

And yet factually correct.

[BasiliskXVIII]

21 minutes ago, Troo said:

 

Getting told anything in lawyer speak is in my opinion is lame.

Getting told in lawyer speak to go-play-somewhere-else is extra lame.

Perhaps if you find a polite, neutral correction of your erroneous assertions unpleasant, you should consider avoiding erroneous assertions.

[Troo]

11 minutes ago, BasiliskXVIII said:

Perhaps if you find a polite, neutral correction of your erroneous assertions unpleasant, you should consider avoiding erroneous assertions.

 

Don't be a dick. That would be my preference.

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Troo
maybe there are some semantics here you'd like to quibble over

[Troo]

9 minutes ago, MTeague said:

And yet factually correct.

 

Arguing semantics is pretty weak.

Anything in lawyer speak is in my opinion gross.

Getting told in lawyer speak to go-play-somewhere-else is lame.

 

 

[BasiliskXVIII]

9 minutes ago, Troo said:

 

Arguing semantics is pretty weak.

Anything in lawyer speak is in my opinion gross.

Getting told in lawyer speak to go-play-somewhere-else is lame.

 

 

You appear to have misunderstood. I did not tell you to go play elsewhere, nor do I encourage it. I simply corrected your inaccurate claim that you are forced to trust the Homecoming developers. You are not. You choose to, as we all do by remaining here. That distinction may be semantic, but it is also factual and important.

Edited 10 hours ago by BasiliskXVIII

[Troo]

Just now, BasiliskXVIII said:

You appear to have misunderstood. I did not tell you to go play elsewhere, nor do I encourage it. I simply corrected your inaccurate claim that you are forced to trust the Homecoming developers. You are not. You choose to, as we all do by remaining here. That distinction may be semantic, but it is also factual.

 

Sure you did. And that is shitty.

[Octogoat]

Omg you're both gorgeous, stop fighting.

[Spaghetti Betty]

Does the cottage that new Build Up spawns have a decent mortgage rate? Housing is nuts!

[Psyonico]

2 hours ago, BasiliskXVIII said:

the number of players who avoid an entire powerset because of one underperforming or frustrating power is likely to be much higher than the number of players who love that one specific power and use it regularly.

That’s really not something you can substantiate.

 

 You can tell how many people actively play set X

 

 you can even set an arbitrary limit on what “actively play” means so you can then say how many people don’t actively play a set.

 

 However, unless you have some magical way to survey everyone who plays the game, then there is no way to know why the vast majority of people who don’t play a given set aren’t playing that set.

 

 Since most people don’t visit these forums, much less post their feelings on given sets, you can’t get an accurate picture.

 

 The people on these forums are biased in ways the people who are not on these forums are not.

[Troo]

16 minutes ago, Spaghetti Betty said:

Does the cottage that new Build Up spawns have a decent mortgage rate? Housing is nuts!

 

The average United States home value is currently $367,969. Your cottage is free with gimping your favorite power. Signup here: Link

[BasiliskXVIII]

11 minutes ago, Psyonico said:

That’s really not something you can substantiate.

 

 You can tell how many people actively play set X

 

 you can even set an arbitrary limit on what “actively play” means so you can then say how many people don’t actively play a set.

 

 However, unless you have some magical way to survey everyone who plays the game, then there is no way to know why the vast majority of people who don’t play a given set aren’t playing that set.

 

 Since most people don’t visit these forums, much less post their feelings on given sets, you can’t get an accurate picture.

 

 The people on these forums are biased in ways the people who are not on these forums are not.

Certainly, we can't know every individual player's reasons for avoiding a powerset. But design decisions have to be made based on the information we do have, even if it isn't exhaustive.
 

There's a reason consumer research relies on focus groups and representative feedback rather than polling every human on Earth. If a power or set is consistently avoided, rarely picked, and regularly mentioned in feedback from engaged players, that tells us something valuable. It may not capture every opinion, but it's still a better foundation for decisions than doing nothing for fear of being incomplete.
 

At some point, a line has to be drawn. We can act on observable patterns, or we can wait forever for data that will never be perfect.

[SeraphimKensai]

31 minutes ago, Spaghetti Betty said:

Does the cottage that new Build Up spawns have a decent mortgage rate? Housing is nuts!

And pay for its impact fees to connect to public facilities like potable water and sanitary sewer? I wouldn't mind an ADU in the backyard that way if I have family coming to visit they can sleep in a fancy shed out back.

[Psyonico]

8 minutes ago, BasiliskXVIII said:

There's a reason consumer research relies on focus groups and representative feedback rather than polling every human on Earth.

You skipped the point about Forum biases, which is a real thing.

 

 According to the forum posters, the tank nerfs, for example, would mean the end of people playing tankers. Well, in all the pugging I’ve done since the patch dropped (both low and high level) I haven’t seen a noticeable difference in the number of tanks  being played.

 

Similarly, Kinetic Melee is considered the worst melee set in the game per the forums, but I still see a fair number of KM toons in the wild across the level spectrum.

[BasiliskXVIII]

6 minutes ago, Psyonico said:

You skipped the point about Forum biases, which is a real thing.

 

 According to the forum posters, the tank nerfs, for example, would mean the end of people playing tankers. Well, in all the pugging I’ve done since the patch dropped (both low and high level) I haven’t seen a noticeable difference in the number of tanks  being played.

 

Similarly, Kinetic Melee is considered the worst melee set in the game per the forums, but I still see a fair number of KM toons in the wild across the level spectrum.

The forums aren’t the only venue the devs use to gather feedback. They also take input from Discord, monitor in-game behavior through metrics, and apply their own judgement based on feasibility and available manpower. No single channel speaks for the entire player base, but each provides useful signals.
 

Your own examples actually support this. During Open Beta, there was strong forum pushback against the Tanker changes, with many claiming it would ruin the archetype. The devs made adjustments but ultimately stood by the core of the update, and pushed it live. Tankers are still widely played. That suggests the devs considered broader data and were confident in their assessment.
 

Take Kinetic Melee as another example. The forums have been vocal for years that it underperforms, and there's plenty of both anecdotal and numerical feedback to support that. Yet the devs haven’t made significant changes to it. That suggests they’ve either evaluated the feedback and concluded that the set is functioning acceptably as is, or they’ve chosen to prioritise other issues given limited development resources.
 

In short, forum sentiment is only one piece of the puzzle. The devs know that, and their decision-making reflects it.

[golstat2003]

6 hours ago, BasiliskXVIII said:

I don't dislike the Cottage Rule as a general principle. It's a good idea to avoid radically changing powers, especially when players have built characters and playstyles around them. But in practice, the way it's applied often ends up protecting mechanics that no longer make sense or that actively hold powers back from becoming better.
 

The real issue is that "core functionality" is such a vague concept that a power can be completely changed in feel and value without technically breaking the rule. For example, if Build Up were changed tomorrow so that instead of granting +100% damage and +20% ToHit, it gave +1% damage and +0.2% ToHit, it would still "function" the same way. But it would also be a useless power, and I would be just as upset as if it built a small cottage at my location. It would be just as disruptive as a rework, and arguably worse, because it pretends to preserve the original power while stripping it of all utility.
 

In other cases, powers have been renamed and redesigned outright, like what happened with /Regen. I don't have an option to hold on to Resurrect as it was, I get Second Wind instead. Likewise, Dull Pain is now Ailment Resistance. Even if the reworked regen is generally improved, the practical result is the same. I still have to rebuild my character from the ground up to accomodate the changes. So what's actually being preserved?
 

A good example of the problem is Black Hole. Originally, it made a group of enemies intangible, removing them from combat. This was often more harmful than helpful. It has since been changed so that it now pulls enemies into a central area, giving it a much more useful function. However, for enemies that resist the pull effect (mostly AVs and EBs) it still applies the old intangibility effect. So you now have a power that mostly works as a mob gatherer, but still retains a piece of its old design just often enough to cause serious problems. You can accidentally, or deliberately, phase out a major target and force your team to wait around doing nothing until it reappears. And because you cannot cancel the effect, it can easily stall a fight and give bosses time to regenerate or use healing powers.
 

This is a case where the Cottage Rule is preventing a usable power from being a good one. The power has already changed in function, but because a piece of the old behavior is still technically present, it can't be properly cleaned up without violating the letter of the rule. That is not preserving the spirit of the game. It is preserving a design legacy for its own sake.

I understand the desire to avoid disrupting players who return after long breaks, only to find their favorite powers completely unrecognizable. But there has to be room for thoughtful, targeted reworks when powers are broadly disliked, rarely used, or designed for a game that only ever existed in the launch devs' theorycrafting. Used wisely, the Cottage Rule is a helpful guideline. Applied rigidly, it becomes an excuse not to fix things that clearly need fixing.

And you have summed up my issues with this rule perfectly. Thanks

[golstat2003]

2 hours ago, Psyonico said:

That’s really not something you can substantiate.

 

 You can tell how many people actively play set X

 

 you can even set an arbitrary limit on what “actively play” means so you can then say how many people don’t actively play a set.

 

 However, unless you have some magical way to survey everyone who plays the game, then there is no way to know why the vast majority of people who don’t play a given set aren’t playing that set.

 

 Since most people don’t visit these forums, much less post their feelings on given sets, you can’t get an accurate picture.

 

 The people on these forums are biased in ways the people who are not on these forums are not.

and this is why I prefer the devs making powers decisions. Not players.

[Troo]

5 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

and this is why I prefer the devs making powers decisions. Not players.

 

I agree. (with both @golstat2003 and @Psyonico)

 

 

However that's not who is making suggestions en masse. 

That is not who is repeating over & over how bad a power or powerset is until it must be true and gets added to a mysterious list to be 'addressed'.

It's often the squeaky wheel, the complainer, the numbers > fun folk pushing powers. (no insults intended, I've complained)

 

The change process could be better served, in my opinion, by laying out a goal and asking for some feedback to the goal; rather than getting picked apart at the 11th hour over minutia. Then take the feedback, (and this is important) restate the goal given the feedback, and go do what needs to be done. Plenty of warning something is happening and a general idea what is coming down the pipe. A little communication goes a long way. C'est la vie.

Meeting and exceeding expectations builds trust.

 

A guideline like the Cottage Rule (which is just some made up shit) goes a long way toward earning trust, retaining, or losing trust. 

Homecoming could layout their own guideline,.. but they haven't. (I don't blame them, getting your words thrown back at you isn't always fun)

Instead we get the occasional confirmation that, yes, Homecoming is endeavoring to be mindful of original core functions & purposes while making improvements and will try to retain them. That's basically the Cottage Rule. It's fairly subjective and worthy of discussion over time.

 

Edited 2 hours ago by Troo

[Go0gleplex]

4 hours ago, Spaghetti Betty said:

Does the cottage that new Build Up spawns have a decent mortgage rate? Housing is nuts!

 

No...as a former Public Works Permit Reviewer/Construction Inspector...I can say with all truth that it IS, in fact, a Nemesis plot. (in a manner of speaking)  Nuts would mean there was no actual intention to create the problem and would be much more preferable. 😉 lol   

[BasiliskXVIII]

Ah, yes, of course...

 

[Super Atom]

5 hours ago, Troo said:

Homecoming could layout their own guideline

 

 

 

[Troo]

4 minutes ago, Super Atom said:

 

 

Interesting and so very insightful. 

Question: Are you the tool in the redshirt or are you implying that is the Homecoming team?

All I ask is that you try, just a little bit.

..but you do you.

[Super Atom]

5 minutes ago, Troo said:

Interesting and so very insightful. 

Question: Are you the tool in the redshirt or are you implying that is the Homecoming team?

 

You don't get invited to many parties, do you?