This is largely a response and expansion on what DariusWolf said, [url=https://cityoftitans.com/comment/164768#comment-164768]above[/url].

First, is that I'm thinking that each of his suggestions, with the exception of 4 and 5 which would need to be considered together to avoid expected-bounds breaking exploits, should be considered separately if at all possible.

1a, a Walk mode, should, IMO, be at the top of the list. I can't think of an MMORPG I've played that doesn't have this. WoW and CO both had it. I consider it to be expected of a first rate MMORPG

I'm fairly sure 2, a personal residence/base, is already being planned, that's the way I read some of the KS levels and add-ons, at least.

To 3 I would like to add changing the dialogue responses of NPCs to the character when using a different name. But this may not be possible without overcoming the same problems that 4 and 5 will bring.

Tannim, is it at least possible to consider 1-3 without dragging 4 & 5 into the discussion?

Tannim222 wrote:

Walk is planned for already.

It is possible to obtain a personal residence / base in the game. The location (which dictates the starting size) will have in-game costs.

We aren’t having a renaming system per ccostume / for your character, and even if we did a “fake name” as suggested in this thread the NPCs wouldn’t use it. The world would still recognize your character for the exploits, alignment, and faction repuatations that of your main ID.

So you get two of your 3.

Whoa are you saying our hideout in the game will have an actual unique location? Not just the same spot everyone else goes to to get in their hideout?

Awesome! That is a very cool feature!

Redlynne wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:

So let's say we create a "civilian" disguise, which means we also have to provide the "civilian" faction status to the selected costume slot. This can result in interactions that should normally NOT happen to the character.

Um ... that's kind of the point?
People tend to react to Bruce Wayne and Batman ... um ... differently?

Um...you're kind of missing the point.

Redlynne wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:

And when those interactions occur. like say "completing a mission" which affects faction standing, has alignment implications. etc... we hare in essence going down a rabbit hole that we already identified as something we don't want to do.

Um ... simple answer ... complete with built in guard rails ... while in Secret ID, objectives that require Super ID are NOT completed (or are otherwise "suspended") until you return to Super ID. That way, the most you can use your Secret ID for is "moving around/past stuff" in order to reposition yourself ... or roleplay. And even then, the locations where Secret ID could be used wouldn't be the entire game world and every mission instance. I figure that MOST (if not all) mission instances would be coded as Super ID only ... except for rare and explicit exceptions (that wanted to make use of the Secret ID option in some form or fashion), so that becomes a non-issue. Some parts of the game world would be coded as Super ID only ... like sewer systems under the streets, because Civilians "don't belong" down there ... and so on.

So now we have to add code to locations from here on through eternity to support the secret id for the super id only. That won't make a mess of things at all. I will be sure to tell the map team we have to add new code to the level design of the city, and every instance to support something that is meant to be "optional". Yeah....

Redlynne wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:

The next [size=200][b]option[/b][/size] is to create "civilian disguise only missions" which end up being, again limited in concept, limited in scope, and require different coding for how we provide rewards, affects it has on the character and so on.

Um ... overblown much?
Yes, it would be an OPTION.
It's also an option that can be deferred/declined until a lot of the rest of the game gets settled into place. In other words NOT A LAUNCH FEATURE.

Tannim222 wrote:

And since this is a completely different set of rules, we are in essence, having to create a new game mode rules within the current game construct - which will either get limited provision resulting in little use over the entire game, or have to be fleshed out to be its own game.

Again, overblown concern. What is being asked for is a roleplaying Quality of Life feature that explicitly isn't combat related, and if anything would fall under the heading of Stealth Mission enabling capabilities ... so that an actual Stealth Power or Invisibility or whatever doesn't necessarily need to be used in order to "get around" the setting without being noticed. What's being asked for is a [b]Blend Into The Crowd[/b] functionality, that only "works" if there's a crowd of Civilians around doing the same things for the PC to blend into. Again, camouflage rather than invisibility is the point and purpose here.

HOW that might be used and purposed in post-launch content (or even IF it should) is a question that can be deferred for another time, specifically post-launch.

In other words, nice [b]Premature Optimization[/b] you've got going there ... be a shame if anything happened to it ... no?

So, is it an role play QoL feature, or a stealth game feature? It can't be both. If Civilian ID as a Secret ID is a stealth game feature, it needs regular support. The game is designed around combat. Any stealth is done through Powers. Not by a Costume slot. Making a Costume slot that does what Powers are meant to do is not supported by the costume system. Even so, if we were to do so, the Civilian Costume Slot idea would get minimal support compared to what the game is designed around - that being combat. Which means that the Civilian Only missions would be very few and far between. Even if we added 1 mission every quarter for 5 years, that is only 20 missions. Which while waiting for that one new mission over the first couple of years. And those would be limited by level. Making them even fewer to use over time on the same character. If we are going to allow stealth as an option to complete missions, it would be done through the selection of powers, or the very rare temp power provided for the mission. Not through a Costume selection.

Redlynne wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:

It was decided by the team when this idea and others was given oh, about 2 months into the concept phase of the game through even after we entered post production, that we would either dedicate the entire game to work with such a system so it is fully integrated, regularly supported and thus utilized, or we wouldn't implement it into the game at all.

Well, nice to know you're keeping an open mind about what your game can (and can't) do ...

Well its nice to know that you continue to ignore design goals and game scope and use reading comprehension. We either will do it RIGHT to work with this game and every system in it, or we won't do it. We already identified that to do what you are suggesting affects multiple systems in the game, would increase the design time to incorporate and support through continued development, has an impact on certain aspects of the game that we considered NOT desirable. Oh and yet it is supposed to be an "optional role play QoL" feature.

Tannim222 wrote:

Project_Hero wrote:

I like this info about bases.

I assume we'll be able to have a personal base (Bat Cave) and a ST (Super Team) Base (The Hall of Justice)?

Also the unique entry points are nice, but will we also be able to teleport to bases?

Your personal lair can be one or the other. You can have both, but will end up needing to maintain the cost of both. We also have a consideration to allow personal spaces to be connected to a ST base as a shared location. Again, both costs must be covered.

Teleporting to a base means that you have the right equipment at your base to create your base teleport temp power which also increases the cost of your base for said equipment.

First of all that all sounds pretty awesome.

Secondly are ST bases costs shared throughout the team? Is team money pooled up for base resources?

By having both I assume that means that a player can have their personal lair and as a Super Team Leader can also construct a super team base, or can everyone have both a personal lair (that can be shared with a super team base) and also a base for their Super Team to use?

Also also does this mean any player on a Super Team can essentially have a room -in- a super team base by linking a personal lair to the super team one? Cause if so, that's really really cool!

Edit: Changed the terminology to, hopefully, line up with dev terminology

Tannim222 wrote:

I probably opened a can of worms here. This stuff was meant more for an update. ST base costs are to be covered through the ST base account the ST owner / officers setting through permissions (only used for ST payments, not a bank).
A personal space can be upgraded to a ST base, they are essentially one and the same. When selecting locations you register for personal or ST use. ST uses provide some different functions over personal space. This may change of course.

And yes, this means you can have "your room" at the base.

Sounds awesome. Especially the room bit. Can have a Titans Tower with all members having a room. Well, all except the one who's room is technically the Tower itself, if I'm understanding you correctly. I predict there'll be a lot of ST leaders who are not technically part of the ST (in RP) just so that everyone can get their own room/lair/personal space while still being part of (and leading) a Super Team.

I eagerly await a full update on bases... Though I assume that will be a while.

Wow, some interesting information actually spawned from that dumpster fire of an argument. It's cool that you're planning unique spaces for player bases. I'm curious as to how there'd be enough space for this with tens of thousands of players, but I'm probably overthinking what's actually being planned.

DariusWolfe wrote:

Sigh. I still really want to see something like this. I also feel that Tannim is WAY exaggerating the concerns around this. I also feel that other players (less in this thread than some previous ones, but give it time, I suppose) are asking for something way too complex from this; obviously individual desires will vary, though.

What I want from a secret identity system, in order of importance:

1. Secret identity costume slot(s) - doable with systems that will already be in-game.

Just out of curiosity but how would secret identity costume slots be different from normal ones in your mind since you do make a distinction between them?

Redlynne wrote:

Louis Garou wrote:

I'm curious as to how there'd be enough space for this with tens of thousands of players, but I'm probably overthinking what's actually being planned.

Easy.

Personal Housing (content) will be instanced, rather than a part of the shared world.
"Doors" to the Personal Housing content won't be singular per zone ... instead it will be distributed over the landscape (like Mission Doors), and you simply pick which Door you want to use to enter your Personal Housing instance.
From there, it's not that big of a leap to allow multiple Doors to access the same Personal Housing instance from multiple locations in the shared world.

That’s exactly how bases work in DCUO. You buy a base in a particular place on a map, and from then on that’s where the door is for your base, but it leads to your instance. Likely there are hundreds of people who have a base there.

Not only is it plausible but it has been done.

And ideally, if you are at such an entrance, you only know about it if it is yours or if you otherwise have permission to enter.

Tannim222 wrote:

Fils Du Nord wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:

So, is it an role play QoL feature, or a stealth game feature? It can't be both. If Civilian ID as a Secret ID is a stealth game feature, it needs regular support. The game is designed around combat. Any stealth is done through Powers. Not by a Costume slot. Making a Costume slot that does what Powers are meant to do is not supported by the costume system. Even so, if we were to do so, the Civilian Costume Slot idea would get minimal support compared to what the game is designed around - that being combat. Which means that the Civilian Only missions would be very few and far between. Even if we added 1 mission every quarter for 5 years, that is only 20 missions. Which while waiting for that one new mission over the first couple of years. And those would be limited by level. Making them even fewer to use over time on the same character. If we are going to allow stealth as an option to complete missions, it would be done through the selection of powers, or the very rare temp power provided for the mission. Not through a Costume selection.

I understand you might be tired of this subject, but you mentionned relying on powers for stealth and not costumes. So that got me thinking : what if the civilian costume was to be activated by a power?

Consider you are toggling said power, it would either disable other powers OR be itself disabled when other powers are activated (can only be activated outside of combat). Activating that power would put the costume of the dedicated costume slot on the player until the ability is deactivated. The way I see it, that power would be a stealth working only on the civilian faction. I don't know anything about game programming, but in my head that's a matter of adding one boolean condition to the triggering of civilian interaction with the player.

Oh it was considered. We powers aren't tied to costumes. Which means that if we were to do something like this, it would be say an earned "temp power" which assigned the costume of a civilian. We could force it to toggle off powers / etc., but you wouldn't be renamed, have no control over the appearance, and there are issues with allowing players to suddenly change their faction reps whenever they want.

I was not calling for a change in faction reputations, I was suggesting that the civilian faction didn't act on reputation when the player is in their secret identity, ignoring the player.

I also don't see how the player couldn't have a certain degree of control over the civilian skin. Why could the civilian form not call on a dedicated costume slot when toggled and back to the hero costume once untoggled?

As for the name, that's not an issue for me personnally.

Of course, I don't know how your system works, but my experience in programming made me learn that there's always a way to make things work. But listen, if you say it can't be done easily, I believe you. Just please don't put that feature in the garbage bin already.

Powers aren’t connect to codtume slots.

We won’t have something like a simple costume switch that will affect alignments and all faction reps of your character for all factions within the game.

Especially if that costume will allow your character to go places and interact with NPCs that it nromally should not be able to.

We especially have no plans to support designing content around such a thing eithet as I explained quite sufficiently in previous posts.

If you want to try and stealth your way to other places, you will need to take the appropriate powers, decimating power slots. Most notify stealth powers. And those will have counters to them, whether it is the Awareness of NPCs in areas, special obstacles with their own awareness or even NPCs / obstacles with super senses powers that can counter different forms of stealth.

Now if you want to role play the lizard person covering ina cowl when stealth is activated by switching to that costume and using stealth, knock your self out.

But you will be dealing with stealth and the users of the systems that it interacts with through awareness, super sense powers, faction rep, and yournalignment still intact.

I purposely avoided this thread after I saw the title, but I got bored and decided to take a look.

Lothic wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:

Again, your tone is t conducive to a polite discourse. I won’t directly respond with anything meaningful related to the game when this occurs after this.

I wasn't the one who said I wasn't going to "debate" the subject then proceeded to do so, then claim I was done talking only to re-post here again. Your accusations that I'm not being "polite" only seem to crop up when I make a point you can't directly refute, which in itself is toddler-esque.

Look, I get that you don't really like this QoL suggestion and I'm sure you could single-handedly prevent it from ever being worked on just to spite me personally. But I'm not sure you want to start to gain the reputation of arbitrarily denying the general playerbase useful QoL features just because individual forum posters might piss you off from time to time. Do it or don't do as you wish, but at least spare me (and the rest of us) the silly excuses. "Going backwards with the code?" *sigh* Do you really consider [b][i]adding[/i][/b] QoL features as "going backward"?

I am surprised no one has called Lothic out for his behavior. Let's just take a look at how he talks to/about a MWM dev (my emphasis in [color=red]red[/color])

Lothic Post#30 wrote:

Yeah? So what? Who actually said that a Secret ID system MUST dynamically interact with the NPCs? You've gone and made what could have been a simple molehill into the Mt. Everest of challenges for yourself. No wonder you're just throwing your hands up in the air and instantly giving up on it.
[color=red]You've apparently already given up on ANY kind of Secret ID system due mostly to your lack of vision[/color]. I'm simply asking for you to reconsider a version of it that would be much easier for you to possibly accomplish.

Lothic Post#31 wrote:

[color=red]Yeah that would be ton of work if that was the ONLY WAY Secret IDs could possibly work. Unfortunately I'm not as single minded about this issue as Tannim appears to be.[/color]

Lothic Post#33 wrote:

It's [color=red]sad when a Dev decides to be this closed minded[/color] about his own game...
If you can't see the benefit of being able to "name" character slots so that RPers can at least RP secret IDs (again because you've already told us you aren't giving us a "real" Secret ID system) then I'm not sure what to think.

Lothic Post#40 wrote:

Tannim clearly has decided that "Secret IDs" can only mean one thing for COT - a huge unwieldy sub-system that involves NPCs and missions being totally disrupted throughout the entire game. No wonder he's reluctant to entertain that idea; if I were him I'd be frustrated talking about it too.
[color=red]I simply think it's sad that he can't be bothered to consider[/color] a reasonable compromise to that that would be much, much easier for him to implement.

Lothic Post#43 wrote:

But [color=red]again in light of the fact that Tannim wants absolutely nothing to do with a "full-featured" Secret ID system I'm finding it simply childish that he's not willing[/color] to accept this reasonable compromise.

Lothic Post#45 wrote:

[color=red]Tannim claims the "big/fancy" version of a Secret ID subsystem is too hard to do so let's stop trying to do that shall we?[/color]

Lothic Post#51 wrote:

[color=red]Good gods the Devs could call the "custom nameplate" idea whatever the f$ck they want for all I care. If Tannim is really getting hung up on this discussion because he's getting confused over the term "Secret ID" that's his problem, not mine.[/color]

Lothic Post#54 wrote:

[color=red]You've got to be shitting all of us with that... Are you literally saying you will never update the character sheet of CoT... ever... until the end of time?[/color]
My god at least you know how to make me lol you stubborn bastard. ;)

Lothic Post#58 wrote:

[color=red]Just like saying[/color] "we can't possibly make a change to a GUI" [color=red]is pure Dev bullshit? Please, if you're going to make an excuse like that[/color] don't offer it to someone who's been working professionally in a Computer Science oriented career for 25+ years.

Lothic Post#61 wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:

I’m done. You constant disrespectful attitude is not conducive to a conversation and is bent on being purely argumentative. I took time ai didn’t have to try and be kind and respectful in my replies. If you can’t afford that courtesy I don’t have anything further to say.

I've merely offered you a reasonably simplistic compromise (which again was suggested long and often by others before this thread ever appeared) to a feature you are unable/unwilling to implement. [color=red]I'm sorry that "ruffled your feathers" to this extent. *shrugs*[/color]

Lothic Post#65 wrote:

Cobalt Azurean wrote:

Tannim: much respect.

[color=red]When he earns it, sure.[/color]

Lothic Post#67 wrote:

Ultimately I don't really think it helps any of us to blindly act as "Yes Men" toward the Devs. [color=red]If that upsets them that's their problem, not ours.[/color]

Tannim222 Post#68 wrote:

I certainly was not throwing a “tantrum”. I’m just not going to waste my time on someone who isn’t going to at the very least maintain a respectful discourse. At that point anything ai say that isn’t overwhelmingly in agreement with said person will always be contentious. As proven already. By equating my statement with behaviors typically ascribed to toddlers.

Lothic Post#70 wrote:

You can kill the messenger (me in this case if that wasn't clear to you) but it wasn't actually "my" message - it's just one I happen to agree with. This "alternative" for Secret IDs [color=red]can't possibly be new/foreign to Tannim. If it is then his memory (if not his smarts) could be called into question[/color].

Lothic Post#75 wrote:

[color=red]I've off-handedly joked about "having to act the fool" to get anything done around here.[/color] It's kind of weird when that methodology actually proves to be useful to some degree.
Also [color=red]the very idea that you'd sort your QoL feature to do list by "order of receipt" instead of "priority of difficulty" is laughable in-and-of itself[/color] but I guess I won't press my luck when I'm apparently "getting my way" here. [color=red]Here's hoping the first item on the list doesn't single-handedly take ten years to finish.[/color] ;)

Lothic Post#77 wrote:

Perhaps when you reflect back on this conversation you'll realize you just tried to shameless placate me with false baubles and trinkets... or you'll do the right thing and actually try to get this working as suggested. Time will tell I suppose.

Come on Tannim - try thinking outside the box here. I know you can do it. If changing character names are so "boohoo too hard" let costume slot names appear as subtitles over or under the character's actual name. Good grief man do I literally have to think of everything here?

It looks like you were both talking past each other a bit. Then Lothic just leaned in on the character assault of Tannim to try and get his way. Many times Lothic tries to characterize his argument as "reasonable" but does not behave in that manner. Many many times Lothic behaves as if this game is his and only his vision is the true way to go about things. To be fair, some of those ideas have merit and will probably make for a better game experience (based off of what we know about the game so far), but the manner in which he communicates these ideas is not desirable. These people (MWM) are here to make a good game and breathe life back into a world where we all can enjoy ourselves. Purposely making this creative effort less desirable (for all involved) to participate in seems to be in conflict with that goal.

And, just to pre-empt the response: I am sorry that you got offended by this revelation of your strong arm tactics Lothic. :P

Honestly, Planet10, Lothic always does that. I’ve even seen a developer scared away from the forums permanently by interactions with Lothic. (Though in Lothic’s defense, that particular developer escalated things so blame was shared in that case.)

I think that we’re all kind of used to it. And personally I like Lothic, despite a frequent lack of tact. Lothic is somewhat a force of nature.

Fils Du Nord wrote:

Well I'll be the devil's advocate. It appears to me that the most active member of MWM is absolutely categoric in his views and will not consider input from the community. But hey, that's just my impression.

The devs do consider input from the community (things have been changed in the past). It's just that Lothic tends to throw a hissy fit over his/her pet ideas that would either require stopping production and re-coding parts of the game, is not worth diverting resources at this time to address, does not fit within the current vision of the game at launch, or what have you. The "ship has sailed" on several aspects of this game at this point, the devs have to keep moving forward or we'll be in a Star Citizen situation here. His/her personal attacks on the devs also do not help matters I would imagine. Personally I'd just advise the MWM devs to ignore him/her if he/she starts flinging insults (i.e. "don't feed the trolls"), but that's up to them how far they want to engage with certain members of the community.

Interdictor wrote:

Someone has to be this board's "Golden Girl" I suppose...

Don't you start in on that too. Backhanded comments aren't nice nor justified no matter who's making them.

DariusWolfe wrote:

That said... Tannim does not strike me as someone who is good at taking feedback that doesn't already agree with his perspective. On this topic alone I've seen the discussion devolve into Tannim arguing very dismissively with multiple posters [I] on three separate occasions[/I], and this topic isn't the only time I've noticed that; and I've only been hanging around these forums for less then half a year.

As far as I'm concerned, Tannim shows almost infinite patience in attempting to have calm, reasoned discussion with players who can be rude, childish, entitled, and insulting to him personally. I'm amazed how often he is willing to repeat detailed explanations to those who refuse to acknowledge his expertise on the design of the game. On those rare occasions where he expresses some frustration, as far as I have observed it's only when some individuals forcefully persist in their completely inappropriate behaviour. It worries me that some seem to support that negative sort of discourse instead of Tannim's more civil approach.

If I seem unreasonable, I’m sorry. I can only say that many things Inmay or may not like do not factor into my stance on statements made on the boards towards ideas.

They are based on what has been decided by a team, often people who are in higher position s of authority than I. There are things I have fought for, ideas that were brought up later by fans on there forums, which have been irrevocably shut down definitively.

All I can do at this point is to tow the line and do my best to explain why.

It may seem reasonable to allow players to have a power connected to a costume. Technically it is possible.

It won’t happen however. That is a hard line in the design. Especially if that “power” is actually a system which interacts with multiple other systems that can affect many parts of the game.

The idea then goes from a little QoL RP feature to a systematic effect on multiple systems.

Player will have the capability to use a costume slot to change an outfit and go places to role play.

Some of the “simple ideas” have broad implications. Ones that were considered and determined to be to far in scope u less we changed many aspects of the game to fully support.

Some simple ideas are half measure which don’t actually provide any function.

If you feel I have been overtly harsh and dismissive, I truly, honestly am sorry. If by me entering into threads like this and being honest as ai can makes you believe me to be the bad guy, I Amber’s saddened.

I do my best to track threads with fans’ ideas and keep track of them, noting things for possible inclusion and discussion when that topic will get covered or can get covered in future team meetings. I keep an extensive QoL list and plot out plausible time lines based on plans for the continued development of the game and adjust as the team discusses things.

No one told me to do this. No one else is doing this. If I stop, practically nothing will ever come of many discussions.

But when something has been discussed to death, necroed, killed, necroed, banished, and on, and I have to explain this as best I can as to why it isn’t happening but to other people it “seems reasonable”, the devil is in the details and when some of those details are provided I guess that makes you the devil.

And this really bothers me. To the point that I have considered removing my thread tracking and just letting it all fall to the way side, put on my blinders and keep my distance for the forums. Many other devs have done this.

I may just have to enter a thread post something extremely vague not endorsing or explaining why something isn’t happening or won’t work so I can track the thread without further inrraction.

For what it’s worth I feel you are great at communicating to us about these things, Tannim. We don’t always hear what we want and sometimes some just want to understand the why a bit more. That is just part of being human.

The truth is no matter our background experience none of us are doing or have done what you guys at MWM are attempting, not exactly. So none of us really know how much impact even a seemingly trivial feature could incur.

Instead of keeping perspective folks just cling to their preconceived notions. I am just as guilty of this as anyone. And we all know Lothic can be a bit, persnickety especially when he is only getting on the forum intermittently as right now while he is out of the country.

Don’t be discouraged. Please keep sharing what you can as you can. Just don’t let anyone bait you in to defending/explaining choices beyond your control. Frankly once someone gets asinine about it just let it go. These days people have lost sight of how desrespectful it is to argue with the authority over an answer they don’t like. I blame it on a lack of good parenting, but that’s my soapbox... I think people sometimes confuse brown nosing and respect as the anonymity of the internet has further removed individual responsibility and ownership.

Please just don’t be discouraged. And please for the love of god, keep sharing what you can as you can.

Thanks...

Cinnder wrote:

DariusWolfe wrote:

That said... Tannim does not strike me as someone who is good at taking feedback that doesn't already agree with his perspective. On this topic alone I've seen the discussion devolve into Tannim arguing very dismissively with multiple posters [I] on three separate occasions[/I], and this topic isn't the only time I've noticed that; and I've only been hanging around these forums for less then half a year.

As far as I'm concerned, Tannim shows almost infinite patience in attempting to have calm, reasoned discussion with players who can be rude, childish, entitled, and insulting to him personally. I'm amazed how often he is willing to repeat detailed explanations to those who refuse to acknowledge his expertise on the design of the game. On those rare occasions where he expresses some frustration, as far as I have observed it's only when some individuals forcefully persist in their completely inappropriate behaviour. It worries me that some seem to support that negative sort of discourse instead of Tannim's more civil approach.

Indeed. Offering suggestions and ideas for the game is good, and should be encouraged even, but the way you present those ideas and the way you treat those you are addressing matters as well.

DariusWolfe wrote:

blacke4dawn wrote:

Just out of curiosity but how would secret identity costume slots be different from normal ones in your mind since you do make a distinction between them?

Due to items 3+. A stepped plan to create a different role for the secret ID would be best served by having a dedicated slot already. If there is absolutely no intent to ever create a different role then it's kind of a moot point.

Mind you, [b]I think the roadblocks being presented are exaggerated[/b]. If MWM simply doesn't want to do it, I'd prefer they'd just say so; though the vocal minority just within the currently activity forum community indicates that there is a demand for this sort of functionality.

Then I have to ask, what experience do you have with coding. As Tannim said, what may appear as a simple change can have huge requirements in code changes due to how integrated it is with other parts/systems.
MWM has no categorically dismissed secret ID's, just that it's something that they won't look at until a few years after launch at best due to them wanting to do an all-or-nothing take on it.

Quote:

Tannin indicated that they've considered a power that activates the secret ID mode. This seems doable. Tie activation of the power to a dedicated costume slot. You can sort of do something similar in CO and in CoH using keybinds, so it seems likely that a cleaner connection would be doable from the dev side.

There is a big difference between "mode" and just a costume change. "Mode" requires additional code and most likely additional data to be stored.

Quote:

Now, the display name change would definitely need some additional work that might not seem worthwhile. I'd be disappointed if this wasn't implemented, but I'd understand.

When they go for a secret ID system I'm sure that will be part of it.

Quote:

Civilian reactions would obviously also require some additional work, but it seems to me that it might be worthwhile to have civilian reaction tables that can be changed by circumstances, like temporary powers. What if you have a mission that gives you a disease, like the Dr. Vazhilok line; NPCs might say things like "Are you feeling well, ?" Or perhaps a quart that turns you into a monster; civilians reacting in horror and running away while screaming about the monster makes sense, so this isn't a single-use system, only useable for the secret ID system.

That can be done without explicitly using powers, but rather using (de)buff tags. Most systems like this that are only temporary or situational in nature use (de)buffs ime. Secret ID is neither temporary nor situational.

Quote:

Again, again, again, this does not need to be all or nothing. It doesn't have to be all at launch, and it doesn't have to be all at once. Start with the systems you're already planning on (alt costumes, personal bases) then iterate. Add in changes to civilian reaction tables based on powers.Then create a Secret ID power, give it some mild stealth powers, and tie a blank or custom civilian reaction table ("You look familiar...") to it. Then make that power also activate the special costume slot, and deactivate if the slot is changed.

I agree that is doesn't have to be all or nothing, but sometimes that is the most efficient approach when you also factor in "market forces". See farther down for more detailed explanation.
However it's not just civilian reactions but effectively all NPC's in all factions when we are talking "Secret ID". If all factions (outside of straight civilian) still treated you as your super persona when in secret ID more people than not would call it a half-arsed system at best, and I don't want to think about at worst.
As for stealth, why would many of the factions present (especially the more law breaking ones) in the game accept civilians just wondering around on their premises? To me adding stealth to secret ID doesn't really make sense.

Quote:

Best of all, nothing mentioned here ties down anyone's concept. Maybe my secret identity is Betty Barker, and the costume is jeans and a t-shirt, with a camera around my neck. Maybe the giant lizard-woman wears a deep cowl and hunches down to avoid notice. Maybe the Master of Mysticism uses a nearly transparent form that allows him to more easily escape notice. Maybe Many-Faces changes their Secret ID costume all the time to represent their various disguises. [b]Maybe the guy who doesn't even bother with roleplay uses a duplicate of his main costume so he can go AFK real quick without having to go find a safer place[/b].

And here we have a big problem with just implementing a few pieces of it, it can be used for advantages that would normally require a explicit power choice. This is the whole "stealth" bit that Tannim has been on about, being able to "stealth" a mission without having picked a stealth power nor having taken a stealth buff from contact (if given the option). So many who are in favor of a bits-and-pieces approach to secret ID doesn't seem to think through the full ramifications of the individual pieces proposed.

Quote:

Edit: to be clear, I'm mostly satisfied with what has already been confirmed as coming, but I'd still like to see the other features mentioned, so I'm willing to argue in favor of them.

And as has been explained, they are not completely off the table. MWM is just waiting when they can properly do it all at once instead of doing a few half-arsed pieces at a time. I can draw a parallell to the few early-access games I have had access to, in those the fairly long pace and bits-and-pieces approach made me completely loose interest in the game as a whole. I fear going a bits-and-pieces approach for Secret ID will have a very similar result since many would probably dismiss the final version based upon the previous incomplete ones, as in "it hasn't been good so far so why should I use it now" kinda mentality.
But arguing in favor of something is not the same as harping on and on about it even though you've been given a definitive "not now" answer.

And lastly, since this will become their livelihood you bet they will drive it in a direction where they do what they can to reduce any negative views on it, like having half-arsed "systems" in it. Even if something is fine to you (and even many) it may not be fine to a large enough part of the community to worth implementing.

It's not completely thankless. I'd argue the initial KS investment is a "thank you for starting this" and as soon as the 2nd round opens I'd argue those are a "thank you keep going". Maybe it doesnt seem like people literally type out thank you as much as they do critiques but donations can take their place.

Redlynne wrote:

So yeah, the premature optimization that is preventing Secret IDs from being possible in City of Titans is something of a "cut off nose to spite face" kind of Own Goal™ error ... in my opinion ... particularly given the genre of the setting. It basically means that in City of Titans you can never NOT be super, because the game is being designed for COMBAT, rather than enjoyment, or relaxation, or even just being sneaky rather than brawny. Oops.

I'd argue that based on the stated design goals, the times when you're not "super" are when you're offline. the game is being designed for combat because it's a successor to City of Heroes, another game designed around combat, and a lot of the enjoyment in the game came from such, with most of the rest having come from the unique power fantasies the game allowed you to get away with. The costuming was an addition to that. An extremely good one, but still just an additional point.

I wouldn't call this "cut off the nose to spite the face". I'd say that this is more purity of purpose than anything.

There are other aspects to Secrest IDs in comics, risk of discovery, risk to loved ones, many having to live out mundane activities. We aren’t making a Sims game with super lives.

The decision was made to make combat the focus of the game. The scope and design centers around that.

There was a game that was being made, an mmo where you had a secret IID and super ID. Whileninnyour secret ID you had a job and takes to complete fornthst job and when an alert happened, you would have to figure out how to leave your secret ID behind, go donthe super thing and make it make back.

That game had an entire studio of experienced developers, took over 7 years, and an excess of $100 million dollars. It never saw the light of day.

It also bore a project name eerily similar tomourngame, it was called Titan. It was cannabized and art assets used to create a first person hero shooter.

Yes, Red, we optimized the game’s scope.. It wasn’t premature. It was intentional decision made by the team. We knew that in order to fully support Secret IDs (rememberer we had as many as 5 full options we went through), that we would have to change manybaosects of the core game design that was being put together. The end result required enough effort as to what amounted for our work load to be making 2 games in one.

Can you be sneaky in combat? Yup, you can. It is called taking the right powers in order to use stealth, leveraging mechanics such as perceptions range and threat, and wary of super senses that can counter stealth.

But hey, we were premature on that I guess.

Brand X wrote:

All the secret identity stuff can be done with a costume switch, unless the idea is "I don't want people to see my hero name above the head of my character." which, in that case, is OOC and just a meta thing anyways.

That is something I'd want out of such a thing.

Heck, I'd love to be able to have costumes have different names. Be able to be like Robin and then show up as Red X and have no one actually know they're the same person. You know, without having to make (and level) a whole new character.

Mostly (for me) it's for RP it (I feel) would help reduce the amount of meta-gaming that goes along with open RP. Usually when RPing in MMOs there's not a Game Master to oversee your RP and handle people utilizing meta knowledge or doing such faux pas as Godmoding and the like, which leaves people with two options; Role with it, or have an argument. Neither are wholly satisfactory options.

People meta-gaming is why I usually only put RP notes in my character's bios, things that might be noticed or known about the character, rather than listing their entire backstory.

It's never a huge issue when such things happen it's just an annoyance I'd rather not have to deal with.

Brand X wrote:

That's true, but then you could always just ignore them when such things occur.

Not if they're SG mates or the like. Ignoring fellow SG mates never ends well.

Oftentimes SGs have a few... Let's just say weaker RPers. Usually they're new to RP, young, both, or just RP a bit... Differently. It's never a huge deal, not something to complain up the chain about and, in my experience, the player in question will rattle off some BS reasoning as to how their character would know rather than apologising and doing a small retcon of the convo. So generally bringing it up with them doesn't help matters. Which brings us back to Role with it or argue about it.

Sometimes It's fine, if my character wears nothing but a domino mask then of course their SG mates would recognise them without it. But if I have a character like Ironman who also modulates their voice then no one should really recognize them out of the suit.

Granted any kind of Secret ID system wouldn't eliminate this problem (thanks in part to the global ID) but such a thing, as discussed here, might give players pause as they may not know if you're on a new character or just in your secret ID.

DariusWolfe wrote:

I think the reason why this is a hill I'm ready to die on (figuratively) is that it's not something that goes against the stated intent of CoT, it's something that seems to be a perennial suggestion, indicating enduring interest in the idea, and it's something near and dear to my heart (explicit, systemic support for RP). I will reiterate that I don't want MWM to cater to every whim of the player base. I'd just like to see a bit less [b]"We can't/won't do that, here's why..."[/b] and a bit more "We've heard you. We'll see what we can do about this feature down the line."

But if they add "but we'll most likely take a look at it again a few year down the line when we feel we have the spare resources" to the first one then how is that different from your second "line"?

Maybe it's just selective memory but I just can't remember when it has been expressed as a blanket "NO" rather than "we'll look again in some years" when in regards to secret IDs.

Brainbot wrote:

People keep bringing secret identities up but there isn't a consistency in what people want from it's inclusion.
Some want a RP aid, others want in game activities tied to the secret identity, another group wants meta/in game stealth because of an alter ego, some others seem to want two characters rolled into one with each having separate NPC interactions, another asked for a loot benefit because of the secret identity and that's just in this thread.
Even my suggestion of a power or set based on disguise/secret identities is probably not much better than a redundant band aid because any power in it is likely to be found in other sets and won't live up to the expectation of a 'secret identity'.
The sad truth is secret identities are, for all intensive purposes, outside the parameters of a combat focused game and should probably be left up to the players to use the tools provided creatively (powers, chat channels, costume slots and so on) in their efforts to portray a secret identity to the best of their ability.

That's it in a nutshell.

Project_Hero wrote:

Having more tools to be able to do that would be nice.

Another thought on that would be the ability to make your character's bio hidden/private. The ability to only allow some people to view it, like friends only or some such... Or having both a public and private (friends ST members only) bio. Then you could have one be what the world knows about your character and the other be their actual backstory.

Just a thought I recently had.

I will put this on my QoL list when I return from a work trip this weekend.

McNum wrote:

A bit of a tangent, but reading this, one question popped into my head.

Costumes are saved by filename?

Does that mean I can save a costume on one character and load it on another? Because that would be pretty sweet.

You will certainly be able to "export" them as a file that can be used for another character or even copied to another computer.

What I suspect is that they were talking about the server side, since it needs to be stored there so it can be sent to everyone but also keep it if re-installing the game or log in at another computer. Not sure how the data is structured on the server side but I have seen others treat their data-files as if they were a filesystem and have everything in those data-files represented as folders and file. The big advantage of doing it this way is that it doesn't matter if you go directly to disk or go to a "virtual" one, the organization of the data is the same.

Odd, I could have sworn I just saw a cat wearing spectacles...

My main doesn't have a 'secret identity', but a 'public persona'. Other characters don't really have an identity separate from their heroic ID. One of my characters doesn't live in this reality but keeps her real body someplace secure.

The game would have to maintain twice as much data for each character, to support truly 'secret' IDs. Otherwise, how would it know which ID went with what player? How would it be able to tell who knows about what secret? It seems to me, that the best 'secret ID' is to log off - then the game has no idea who you are and you can relax from being 'super'.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Atama wrote:

Foradain wrote:

Odd, I could have sworn I just saw a cat wearing spectacles...

“This is a job for... Astigmatabby!”

*runs painfully into a door frame*

((I would give you both 2 thumbs-up -- if only I had thumbs rather than dew claws! *heavy sigh*))

On topic, it would be terrific (Timmy Terrific-level terrific, even) if, somewhere down the line, the Devs could give us a toggle which would allow us to switch from our heroic persona to a secondary paper doll with our civilian guise and name, sort of the way that some games allow for a 2nd weapon to be toggled.

I’d like the idea of it being a tertiary power set of some kind. That’d make it an option for those who want it but not mandatory, and you’d have to give up a power set if you want it (because maintaining an alter ego is tough, just ask Peter Parker). And the in-game benefit would be that it gives a degree of stealth.

But this would be a feature to add some day not something they need for launch.

Airhead wrote:

The concept of a Secret Identity is majorly complicated by the "Secret" part. It implies behaviour and story changes. RPers would love that, sure, but I doubt they're expecting that. They may just want a civilian alias.

There was a system ripe for aliases in City of Heroes, the "Title". If we could change our title to our civilian name we could be,[center][i]Bahn Praseux aka[/i]
Airhead[/center]

The choice of title may even link to the costume, or just be a shortcut to switch titles. Still runs straight into the brick wall that is "appropriate names". A catalogue of appropriate names is unlikely to contain either "Bahn" or "Praseux" but could become viable if a transaction pays for the resource needed to update the dictionary. Something to consider once RoI trumps QoL.

Others have already suggested this. But this really does no more than just having your alias in your character's bio.

Atama wrote:

Yeah, if you read the rest of the thread, you’ll see a number of people asked for a simple “aka title” tied to a costume change. But others want something more robust. MWM is unwilling to give a watered-down secret identity system, [b]but doesn’t want to devote the resources to a full-blown system[/b]. So that’s a Catch-22 that prevents them from adding any kind of system.

Not quite correct. They (or rather Tannim) have much more expressed it as "not yet". They feel, and I agree with them, that there are more important thing to focus on in the short term and that this is much more of a long term goal.

Atama wrote:

blacke4dawn wrote:

Atama wrote:

Yeah, if you read the rest of the thread, you’ll see a number of people asked for a simple “aka title” tied to a costume change. But others want something more robust. MWM is unwilling to give a watered-down secret identity system, [b]but doesn’t want to devote the resources to a full-blown system[/b]. So that’s a Catch-22 that prevents them from adding any kind of system.

Not quite correct. They (or rather Tannim) have much more expressed it as "not yet". They feel, and I agree with them, that there are more important thing to focus on in the short term and that this is much more of a long term goal.

That was my point, they don’t want to devote resources they’re using to build the game. That’s why my previous post was an idea to be added later (as a power set you can buy).

You made it sound like they were never ever gonna do it.

Also waiting to determine if they have the resources for it at a later time is not a Catch-22 situation, unless you are implying that having any form of secret ID system is effectively the only way for MWM to get the resources needed for building a secret ID system in the first place.

However, the power-set idea has been floated around here as well and it's honestly not that much less work compared to any other system when looked at what features it has. Having it as a power set also doesn't really make sense to me since not many would need to exchange "combat powers" to be able to have a civilian life.

You could broaden it to some sort of just Disguise power set then it could potentially pull double duty as a pseudo secret ID system and possibly having powers that let you mimic NPCs/Players.

On the latter note I'd like to have powers that allow a character to copy another's looks and/or powers. And It could work pretty well as a tertiary powerset with just a handful of powers.

No clue how hard it'd be to implement though. Probably very.

I dont care about this feature personally, but I feel like there should be a technical compromise that is doable since so many people seem to want it. My thought is why not make the secret identity a facade? What I mean is dont have the game change how it sees you at all but allow the name that appears over the character to change for your secret identity name. Like NPC's always see 'Name Box 1' , which also has all your normal info associated with it like reputation, but gets hidden when 'Name Box 2' has letters in it. And PC's can only see box 1 if box 2 isn't active. So even if you are in your secret ID you don't get any stealth benefits, enemies still see you as your super character, and that would be the compromise.

With today's tech, it just seems like this shouldn't be too difficult.

StellarAgent wrote:

Guys, you are all beating on a dead horse. Tannim has stated why we won't get it AT THIS TIME. A couple of years down the road? Maybe. Until then . . . . . can we find something else to talk about?

This is a thread dedicated to this one topic, if you dont want to talk about it go to any of the other hundreds of threads or create a new one. But this thread was created for the sole purpose of talking about it. Theres literally no reason to ask people to stop. You dont have to follow this thread.