AdrianDmitruk
-
Posts
1,328 -
Joined
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Posts posted by AdrianDmitruk
-
-
Hell, I'd be happy with the ability for players to set custom filters through their UIs...
Right now, spam mail with the subject Hi_999 (random 3 digit number) is a problem and has been for several weeks. Imagine if I could set my own spam filter.
Now imagine the spammers not just having to try to circumvent Bioware's (seemingly nonexistent) filter, but custom filters set by every player in the game. Bioware could, in turn, look at their metrics to see what the custom player filters caught and use that data to improve their own.
"But, but, the filters will become so broad we won't be able to communicate with each other!"
No, they won't. Did that kind of spam filter communication breakdown happen with e-mail? Nope.
-
There is a phrase for this kind of thinking: cutting off your nose to spite your face.
If your time truly is that valuable (which I doubt, in any event), you should not be wasting it playing a computer game.
If someone posts "spacebar plz" I don't space bar (or I may just drop group, as I have better things to do than play with an impatient toddler). If they ask "Can we space bar?" or similar, then I space bar.
Naw, it's called utilizing the time the group would otherwise waste by not spacebarring to do other things (like catch up on news).
If someone wants to waste my time like that, I'll only ask once before I reallocate it to other purposes. I won't allow them to completely waste my time; I'll salvage something out of it.
If they then complain that I'm AFK when the convo option comes up, oh well. They should have thought of that before trying to make me stare at a still picture for five minutes (some of the cutscenes in Manaan and SoR were fairly long).
-
I'm one of those spacebar loot runners. Usually by the time a FP pops, I've already been in queue for half an hour or more, and that's after I've already spent an hour crafting across 15 characters before I even get to "play the game" (makes more money than dailies), so I just want to race through it so I can go to bed, so that I can get up early the next morning for work and such.
So I'm one of those ZOMG SPACEBAR NAO peeps.
However, if it becomes clear that the group won't spacebar, I just tab out of the game and read the forums or some such (running the game in fullscreen windowed mode helps a lot with this as the computer doesn't have to re-render everything when I tab back in). Typically this means that the rest of the group must wait for my convo choice to expire when it finally does come up. I only tab back into the game when more spacebarring is required (if there's more convo after the convo choice) or when I hear the others in the group running off to the next objective.
TL;DR: If they want to waste my time by not spacebarring, I'll waste theirs by doing other **** when I'm supposed to be selecting a convo option.
No need to make QQ threads about it.
-
I hope they change the naming system to allow a space followed by a capital letter before they do forced server merges/megaservers.
The anger at losing names due to things beyond player control would be far more severe if the naming system is kept as is. If I lose the name "Andreus" because Begeren Colony is shut down, for example, I'm gonna be upset. If, however, I have the option of renaming him by incorporating legacy surname into his actual name, i.e. "Andreus Makaryk," I wouldn't even care. I suspect that most people who would "lose" their names in a transfer would find appending their legacy name an acceptable compromise instead of the disaster that is losing all semblance of name/character identity. Depending on whether guild ship unlocks transfer (or not) I might still be upset, as I've put a lot of my time and gameplay into expanding said guildship, but that pales in comparison to the "much butthurt in the Force" if I was forced to lose something as basic as my main character's name, along with the reputation I've earned on my home server to go with that name.
-
Or just fix the naming system to be more flexible. SWTOR has the most rigid naming system of just about anything I've played.
I honestly don't give a care if there's more than one Adrian or Andreus on my server. Just allow a space and a second capital letter.
Adrian Makaryk and Andreus Makaryk--yeah those can be unique. With the legacy surname displayed my characters already look like that but I know there are others who would want those first names.
-
Application submitted.
-
That is correct, the new pricing scheme for TFB/S&V cover "run the op until the mount drops". We have enough characters to ensure that you get your mount as a part of the package. On that note, we are no longer selling just TFB/S&V Titles, only the Mounts, or Mount & Title Bundle.
Wouldn't my own character's lockout (I'm transferring a single toon that I intend to do this on) prevent this, at least unless I did the op over multiple weeks until the mount dropped?
We may be able to accommodate that, you'd have to speak to Monika though.I'll make an inquiry on my app, which I'll probably submit after I get home from work tomorrow (making it a month to the day after I first posted in here). Alternatively, if desired, you can mail my toons Kendrew or Kensted (they are both lowbies I made for GTN reconnaissance and stuff like that).
-
Hey guys!
I apologise for the lack of communication lately, I look after the forums for our guild and I've been busy with work and exams!
Please rest assured that we are STILL doing Gear and Vanity sales so if you have any interest please app on our website.
We have also slightly tweaked our sales availability and pricing so please be aware of this.
These changes will also not apply to those who currently have open applications, they will only apply to new applicants.
Thanks for the business, we appreciate you guys giving us something to do while there's no content
Couple questions (since I'd expressed interest earlier; currently my savings are 184/200M before I submit a formal app and start worrying about character transfer):
1. Old prices for TFB/SnV varied depending on whether or not the mount dropped, as it wasn't guaranteed, but the price doesn't vary anymore. Does this mean that the price covers "run the op until it drops" or is there a chance you pay the higher price and still don't get the mount?
2. Prices on SM ToS/Ravagers runs went up drastically. Before I had been thinking about adding that as an inexpensive way to pick up an offspec set bonus, but I don't use the offspec enough for it to be worth 20M to me. Since I'd expressed that I had a big order coming well before the price changes (also when I was 150M poorer), would I be grandfathered in under the old price or expected to pay the new one?
Damn, I posted on May 22nd that my order was probably "a month or so out." Looking at my current account balance, it looks like I'll be damn close too.
-
I wouldn't mind selling a loosening of restrictions to those willing to go preferred tbh. One-time escrows? LOL most games I've played sell full credit cap unlocks.
At least make the escrows apply a permanent unlock to credit cap. So if you buy a 650k escrow, credit cap goes up 650k (I think that'd put it around 1 mil). Set an upper limit probably somewhere between 2-5 mil.
That way those who subscribe to the "try before you buy" philosophy aren't hit so hard by egregious restrictions, with only the commit-to-sub as the one way out, that they decide against buying. The best way to nickle and dime is to make the customer think they're not getting nickle and dimed so hard.
"But, but, you just want an excuse to drop your sub!" Umm, no. I have nearly 200m. No way I'd let my sub lapse to give up access to 98% of it (ok, I guess once you count alts, it'd be more like 90%, but still). The difference between preferred and f2p should be great enough to 1) encourage preferred over f2p, and 2) make preferreds feel like valued customers to encourage them to spend even more money (perhaps this can be accomplished by introducing a higher tier of preferred for those who really have spent a considerable amount on the game, far more than the $5 minimum). The gap between f2p and preferred is too narrow; the gap between preferred and sub is either about right or too wide (and if Bioware is concerned about the gap between preferred and sub getting too narrow, this expansion FREE to subs is a perfect example of how to widen it up again).
-
Yes, yes, please let my Sith Juggernaut meet Kira Carsen, then she will learn the true meaning of passion....
-
It would be a nice QoL improvement for the game to generate an inactivity warning that specifies that mail with items attached is about to expire--and on which server.
I've lost a couple items this way, even though I'm an active player, because I spend almost all my time on a single server. Meanwhile, my alt on a distant server has cartel market items expire even though I could've logged into said server to collect the mail no problem. A quick message sent to e-mail of record would have sufficed.
Then again, I'd also be fine with 90 day GTN listings like EVE Online--limited selling slots on GTN are enough of a limitation I think.
Was that my own fault? Sure, which is why I didn't complain when it happened, even though it sucked. But there are entire industries built upon engineering out human error from existence, or at least trying to. (Why do you think you're about as likely to get struck by lightning as die in a plane crash, for example?)
-
Hey, look, it's yet another Name Purge QQ thread! There was another one of these floating around just the day before, seriously. Perhaps it is time for Bioware to implement a more permanent, elegant solution. Allow a space and a second capital letter immediately thereafter when naming a character. Voila, surnames and exponentially more permutations of a name you want, without having to resort to ugly-*** special characters that make it harder to be social in an MMO (i.e. other people not being able to whisper/mail/otherwise contact you easily and such).
So simple. EVE Online does this. I've never had a problem naming characters there. It doesn't have any the privacy burdens of @account handle crap.
Do this, suddenly there's no reason for a name purge. If you can't come up with a unique first/last name combination, you really are lazy. I can kind of understand the frustration of having to try 20 times to be able to name your character, and ending up with something not close to what you want, but character naming need not be that frustrating.
Bioware, eliminate the source of the QQ and whining once and for all. No, I don't mean actioning the whiners. I mean improving your game to eliminate the source of the whining.
This sounds a lot like "BW, I know my coveted name will not be freed if you use the same, very fair criteria that you used for the last name purge, so you need to change the criteria so that I can have the name I want."I will support another name purge as it have been a while since the last name purge. I believe that they should use the same criteria that they used in the previous name purge, though. I see no compelling reason to change the criteria and changing the criteria will only lead to more demands for subsequent name purges with even looser criteria because Johnny didn't get his precious name.
This. So much this. I oppose character name purges, because they won't solve the root of the problem. Only an improvement of the naming system can do that.
P.S. I've experienced both sides of the issue. I have some no doubt coveted names from launch (or close to it), i.e. Adrian, Andreus, some names I've had to slightly misspell later on, i.e. Darrien, and some names I just had to completely make the fook up after about 20 tries (ended up getting one of those baby name books for this, and usually I'll end up around the 7th permutation of the 4th or 5th name I'm trying if I'm stuck). I do find the primitive naming system a minor irritant/deterrent to creating more alts so I would like to see it improved.
-
Make it a toggle.
Furthermore, I just made a toon on another server. He doesn't have a cargo hold yet (I made him for GTN reconnaissance purposes in preparation for some "space tourism" I'm planning on another character). So we need the ability to have crafting deposited "straight in my lap," if only for toons that don't have their ship yet.
(Also, it's not at all uncommon for PVPers to only do class story to level 10, then level exclusively through PVP.)
-
Reforming the name system to allow a space and a second capital letter thereafter is a FAR better solution.
Name taken? Come up with a unique surname (which is generally far easier to do than find a new first name that isn't mumbo jumbo, some abomination of special characters, or already taken). I've NEVER had an issue with naming characters in games that allow this.
It also would allow us to differentiate surnames within our legacy (the legacy system had so much wasted potential here)...
-
I'd guess it's because some of the affected abilities have other procs as well, and they don't want the Conveyance highlight to "block" the highlights of the other procs. It makes some sense, since Conveyance will proc from every Rejuvinate and therefore is quite easy to keep track of anyway, whereas instant + free Benevolence and instant Salvation are a bit different because of icd and rng respectively.
Though they could have kept the Conveyance highlight on, say, Healing Trance. That way Conveyance would be highlighted without obscuring other procs.
If I'm reading the patchnotes right, we're losing both the procs you mention because the replacement thingie they're doing for the Force Surge stacks (I main the sorc, not the sage--I mean the proc that stacks 3 times) is only for the consumption replacement.
No more free Benevolence and insta Salvation if my interpretation is correct. We'll find out tomorrow, but no need to wait to...I'm gonna put this very euphemistically..."express concern."
-
But they said they wanted to increase Sorcerer options for burst healing the last time they tried to pull this stunt...
-
Hell it's even a nerf for sorc healers. Buff the off heals, nerf the actual heals?
On live, using 3 stacks of Force surge for consumption=48*3=144 Force return.
On PTS, using 3 stacks of Force surge for the new consumption thingie (which will now be a requirement for consumption to be viable as otherwise it's a hardcast LOL)=55 Force return, with all applicable set and talent bonuses, if I added correctly. So we have to spend more than one innervate cycle setting it up unless we get really lucky with RNG, and get back less than the cost of a single heal.
Furthermore, if I read the patchotes right, we're losing access to instant revivification entirely (not that we would ever have the actual option to do it with the above describe nerf), which in turn causes the loss of an instant Dark Heal proc that helped finally make sorc healing viable at 3.0.
I know people QQ about sorcs having Force management too easy but this is at the same time the costs of our heals are going up--and the last time this was on PTS, the "healing has been significantly increased" was NOWHERE NEAR the proportion of the increased Force cost.
Didn't we just get done telling the devs to shove this ****? Ugh why does the new guy who doesn't know anything about the history of our nerf/buff/QQ/nerf cycle have to fck everything up again?
-
That still rules out juggernauts, so you'd need like 4+ assassins starting to defuse at the same time for it to be a problem. Yeah that ain't gona happen every time.
If it is a problem they can still just change how defusing works since the AoE change is better in almost every other situation.
I would rather they change capping in all the warzones to the Novare Coast model.
Yes, you can lay down AOE in NC. However, the range cap also allows you (as a team attempting to cap) to spread out around the AOE to cap as well. So the spam cap can be countered by AOE, but the AOE can then be countered by spreading out (incidentally this also prevents the "stack and cap" scenario dreaded by those who see the need to keep AOE), and spreading out is countered by the individual targeting that Bioware now wants to force upon us, and individual targeting gets countered by spam capping...really it's a scenario in which every cap method has easily understood counterplay except in the most extreme cases of two highly/equally skilled teams who are so skilled at defense and staying alive that no one could cap anything (i.e. 8v8 ranked). Really the only situation where it becomes an issue is at the extreme top end of play where neither team can cap mid. In nearly all other situations, NC capping is more dynamic than capping in the other warzones, and even when I'm saddled with clueless pugs I can still manage to make the game interesting even if I still end up losing. (And hey, sometimes I even pull the win out of my rear end!)
Instead of allowing cappers to counter AOE spam (by spreading out of it), Bioware wants to remove AOE as a method of counterplay, which runs counter to their own stated philosophy of encouraging counterplay. If Bioware feels it is too easy to stalemate an 8-second-cap objective, let them implement the most dynamic cap system currently in the game more widely.
-
It only takes 4 seconds to defuse in Voidstar last I checked.
It's 3.
Which means AOE no longer stopping caps+person in the mob defusing activating CC immunity cooldown=guaranteed defuse!
-
There has been a lot of feedback in support of the change. Why should they heed you instead of those who like it? At the very least it will get played on PTR.
As a proportion of the total? Intensity of the positive feedback? Because most of what could be considered positive feedback that I"ve seen consists of "Well, I guess it's worth testing." Or "Yay gg Force storm spamming sorcs," and there are other ways of dealing with those. (Really if the only thing standing between your team of 7, assuming 1 defender, and a cap is a single FS spamming sorc, global the sorc or you are bad.) And I've read both threads in their entirety.
Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of positive feedback for everything but the AOE cap change.
-
I'm someone...I'm fully in favor of trying this.
I think it's ridiculous that right now, one player can spam AOEs and prevent 8 others from capturing an objective.
A suggestion that's been made is possibly allowing AOE's with timers to still interrupt...but either way, when it's 8 vs 1, the 1 shouldn't be able to spam cheap *** AOE's and stop them from capping. It's nonsensical right now.
If the 8 are even remotely competent, the 1 will be globalled.
The 1 will typically only be able to delay a few seconds at most, and that assumes popping every available DCD, assuming reasonable competence on the part of the capping team. The only exceptions would probably be stealth (and they're probably not using that much spammable AOE) or a Force Barrier+grenade on objective combo.
If the 1 is skilled enough to survive for longer than a couple seconds against the 8, more power to the 1. Or the 8 are just bads. I think the people complaining about this don't see the second or third sorc LOSing and getting a single tick of FS off to interrupt before LOSing again (but then again I'd be fine with giving FS a short CD).
-
I find it disconcerting that there is no sign whatsoever that Bioware is heeding, or intends to heed, the feedback regarding the AOE cap changes.
Targeting is atrocious in this game. A cap should not be able to be zerged simply because target cycling fails to produce all the targets that are capping in a timely manner. That is what AOE damage abilities are for.
To the extent that this is actually a problem in producing stalemates (and I'm not certain that it is), the spammable AOE abilities need to be made less spammable.
The Bioware-proposed solutions will merely result in more drama and hate, as a single defender is unlikely to be able to call incoming, cycle through multiple defenders individually (potentially having to be in more than one place at once if a kiting class), all while popping the DCDs to survive long enough for help to arrive. It's gonna result in more rage in ops chat as the defenders necessarily fail more often, even through no fault of their own. Nor do I believe that we should force two or more players to defense to offset that--as defense is already a boring enough job with not enough volunteers as it is, and this proposed change will further solidify that some classes get "stuck" defending more than others. None of that is a good thing.
-
Recruit gear never really got updated when new tiers of PVP gear were released, because Bioware was afraid of breaking PVE progression by handing out ever more powerful recruit gear for free.
Eventually it got to a point where wearing the recruit gear that you were "supposed" to wear to get your feet wet in PVP was about equivalent to wearing 148 gear (if that) against everyone else in full optimized 174s. It became utterly untenable. At that point, gear>>>skill. (And yes, I was around for those days.)
That is why Bioware implemented bolster, flawed though it may be. Bioware is more or less forced to update it with each new gear tier to prevent PVE gear from becoming BiS (or at least try to), and yet its effects can easily be confined to PVP environments. It's a way around the trap whereby "recruit" gear can never be allowed to keep up with new gear tier releases lest it become too good for PVE.
-
Well I did find it encouraging to find a gold spammer "selling hypercrates cheaper than GTN," and yes, they disclosed their website in the same message so that's how I knew it wasn't legit trade chat.
That means they need credits to buy, not to sell...that 9B loss hurt, spammers?
Post your Codes from San Diego Community Cantina Tour Here
in General Discussion
Posted
Since I redeemed the last one, only fair I put the replacement up
http://www.swtor.com/user/ce/83m4u