Announcements

Check out the new UPDATED Powers List: https://cityoftitans.com/content/power-sets

Missed a few of Artstrong's Twitch streams? Check out some here: https://cityoftitans.com/content/2022-twitch-review

Get the latest Patch now! The MacOS Client Launcher is Now available in the store! If you've already donated $50 or more, you'll find the Mac Launcher on your rewards page. https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/

Join the conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/w6Tpkp2

Another one of my bad ideas to add to the ever-growing list

291 posts / 0 new
Last post
oOStaticOo
oOStaticOo's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 6 months ago
Joined: 10/24/2013 - 06:21
Segev wrote:
Segev wrote:

If you could, instead of using a farm to power-level, just spend IGC to auto-level, would that feel any "worse" than using the farm? If so, why?

There does need to be SOME form of work to it. Instant gratification isn't the best way to go about it.

I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 5 days ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Radiac, UCG is only abuse if

Radiac, UCG is only abuse if it results in an exploit or due to the design of the base system results in a higher than expected rate of return over time. If the reward system is designed with the understanding of the rate of reward over time and players are earning within those bounds it isn't abuse.

I am again getting a sense of people using Cityof as their frame of reference when talking about economy, inflation, and rewards for both dev created content and UGC. The only thing to really use from this reference is that its honestly a terrible example because the old game's reward system was not designed with an economy in mind. And everything that it was built on after that was built on that foundation (as far as reward metrics are concerned).

The same can be said for earning xp rewards and power leveling with regards to UCG or dev created content. Player will find ways around any system we put in place but if the reward (xp) is earned within even the bounds of expected return over time (even if it high) this isn't abuse. As long as we can create a system that can provide some parity between speed efficiency and those who play through and earn achievements, then any power leveling within these bounds is working as intended.

I also never answered Static's question "why bother making dev created content just let the players make it all?"

There are a couple of things: cohesive story lines which is easier to implement throughout the entire fame and on going when you have a dedicated team and consistent leadership.
The devs need to understand the nature of mission design and reward metrics involved in order to implement a cohesive standard system which can continue to be developed.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Brighellac
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 9 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/17/2015 - 00:24
I'd like it if a users

I'd like it if a users mission is considered good enough and it fits game canon, it should be possible for the devs to adopt it and move it from the UGC side of the fence to the PvE side of the fence.

Give their account a star reward for it. And a badge!

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
It occurs to me that in an

It occurs to me that in an effort to make the UGC mission exploit-proof, you'd have to take away any and all rewards for doing them that would be dependent on the number of mobs defeated during the mission. If you did that, you're basically turning it into a deal where all UGC missions reward the same XP and IGC at he end. The exploiter's response to that would be to make a mission where all you have to do is click one glowwie that's right in front of you in a single very small room or something. That to is an exploit, and a really lame one at that.

But in any event since the inherent mechanic in real dev created missions will, I would assume, be scaled to the quality and quantity of mobs defeated during the mission, so the UGC "flat rate" rewards would still pale in comparison to that, or else you have to remove all the scalable rewards for doing dev-created missions too, to level the playing field, and I don't think anyone want's that.

The fact that the maker of UGC content intends to "get high (rewards) off his own supply (of missions)" makes for a really bad conflict of interest and creates a perverse incentive to make more easily cleared maps. Taking away the rewards for doing that effectively takes away the rewards for doing UGC in general, as far as I can see. Even if the UGC exploits only result in a system that's, say, 5 times as fast in generating IGC and swag, that's still a huge advantage over just doing missions. Are you going to ratchet down the overall reward rates of the UGC to one fifth of the going rate from dev-generated missions? If so you're cutting the rewards for doing "good" UGC down by a factor of 5 as well, and that's as bad as taking away the rewards for running "good" UGC entirely.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 5 days ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Radiac, its for this reason

Radiac, its for this reason that we can weight rewards for completing missions bases on achievements. If a mission is a small map with 1 click to complete won't have much if any achievements earned. It may be fast and if you do enough of them strung together it adds up. But if done right, not so much different than doing less missions (even just 1) with higher rewards for completion because a bunch of achievements were earned.

Consider then repeated play through of UGC can result in diminishing returns of reward (at some point there would be a drop off) and repeated play through (of completed) missions of any type results in diminishing returns and the concerns of over / under earning rewards in UCG becomes largely mitigated.

If players are using the system with tools given to them by the devs in a way that is intended it isn't abuse or an exploit. Even if the reward return is 10 times as much or more, because the reward rate of earning potential should understand the bounds of what is expected rate of earning. Of someone does something that isn't intended, like yanking out their ethernet connection to cause something to happen that is not supposed to normally, that's an exploit.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Lin Chiao Feng
Lin Chiao Feng's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/02/2013 - 09:27
((Add to CoT Drinking Game:

((Add to CoT Drinking Game: Drink a shot whenever Tannim writes "UCG" instead of "UGC".))

Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
If I understand you correctly

If I understand you correctly, Tannim222, "based on achievements" means "defeat more badguys and/or click more glowwies = get more rewards" right? This is, ultimately, very similar to the system CoX had, except that the rewards are back-end loaded now and awarded upon completion instead of gotten as soon as the mob is defeated, right?

That, by itself, doesn't discourage anyone from making UGC missions that are chuck full of badguys that are totally vulnerable to damage and deal very little damage of their own, thus achieving some form of "most easy to get XP and IGC possible" scenario with no thought whatsoever toward making "good UGC" in the story sense. Whether or not you want to discourage that sort of UGC creation (the "optimized for rewards per minute" kind, as opposed to the "made for the sake of creativity and story telling" kind which I'm calling "good" UGC), it certainly doesn't ENcourage anyone to do the "good" type of UGC any more than the "no rewards" scenario does. If you put the UGC creation/play behind a real money paywall, you're essentially charging people money to earn the right to powerlevel and farm. For the record I'm not 100% saying "Don't do that." just pointing it out for what it is.

Now, assuming that the diminishing returns factor you're talking about applies not just to UGC but to all content, that still brings us back to "UGC can be set up to be a better XP and IGC per minute deal for the players running it" as above, you're just getting a little less reward for your time than you would without the diminishing return mechanic. This still does not encourage anyone to do "good" UGC either, and as I've said, I think encouraging people who don't care about "good" UGC to do such content isn't really possible at all, so I think it's pointless to try to do ANYTHING for the sake of that.

Is anyone saying there ought to be diminishing returns on UGC but not on Dev-generated content? For the record, I'm not against that as long as it curbs the perverse incentive to make farmable exploitative UGC missions for the sake of PLing and farming only, but I don't think anyone actually said to do this up to this point. And it's still a way of making UGC less rewarding so as to compensate for the exploitability, and there are multiple ways to do that, all of which seem to come back to "reward the UGC less" in some way. And in any event even THAT still doesn't encourage anyone to do "good" UGC content if they don't have the inherent desire to do that content in the first place.

I think the point you're basically making is that "farming/powerleveling ain't so bad that we should try to stop it."

Since I intend not to do much powerleveling of any kind, nor much farming, nor much UGC (creation or play), nor much PVP, I personally don't care what you do or don't do to prevent anything I personally would call an abuse of those things in and of themselves. Maybe the UGC system will TECHNICALLY allow people to write their own fun stories, and maybe 99.9% of missions made will end up being powerleveling farms, it makes no difference to me one way or the other, really. I personalyl don't care if the UGC platform in the game actually successfully provides anyone with a place to make cool fun stories and have other play through them. But the effects that stuff could have on the IGC and Star economy need to be looked at very carefully. If people can generate IGC like 10x faster than you thought when you beta tested the game, that could wreak havok with the IGC supply/demand.

There's no real problem generating sources of IGC in games like this, but finding enough effective sinks is hard, and from what I've heard gear degradation is off the table, at least for now, and that would have been a potential "heavy hitter" for the IGC sink team. That, in my opinion has some of the greatest potential for sinking the extra IGC that the UGC farming might create.

People want to farm UGC rewards for what? To get to the level cap faster and to get better Augments and Refinements (mostly). If any content, UGC or otherwise, generates a lot of both at a fast rate, people are going to use that IGC to craft/acquire those items faster. If there is the possibility that enough of the right kind of Augments and refinements would cause a person to LOSE IGC over time spent fighting mobs due to high maintenance costs, that gives people the ability to spend IGC faster than they earn it, if they choose to push the envelope and slot enough of those high-maintenance Augments etc. That flushing of IGC out of the economy (and out of the hands of the high-rollers who can afford to live large, in the game sense, primarily) would preserve the value of IGC in the economy overall, to some extent.

Now, if a different sink that effective is not found, and theUGC imposes accelerated IGC and swag generation rates, that combination could cause the game to generate IGC too fast to be able to sink it effectively with the sinks that you do have, in the long term, and then you get hyperinflation, eventually. THAT does concern me.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 5 days ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Achievements are not simply

Achievements are not simply defeat more and click on the objective. There is also the possibility that objectives won't simply be something that you click on and wait out a timer but something that has more than one way to resolve it. Achievements are more likely to be more connected to dev content. As players play through dev created content and continue to earn achievements they will earn greater rewards through our Challenges system. I can't go into detail but it is a system which can provide greater reward possibilities as dev designed missions are played through. So yes earning achievement in player made content will be possible, greater rewards are possible through dev content. One may end up being faster, the other can end up rewarding better but slower. But over time, their range of reward may end up statistically similar.

Playing through of UGC (how did I not catch that) won't benefit from these greater reward earnings but they have the potential to be built toward speed and efficiency. Again, this in of itself is not negative behavior in the nature of abuse and exploits, as ling as players are using the tools in a way that the devs have allowed them to be used[/b]. This is where understanding what the expected bounds of reward return are for the game and making sure that no matter what happens, players don't exceed those bounds.

And while its time consuming and most likely to be a rarity if ever due to simply the time constraints involved, I am totally in favor of devs promoting player missions to full fledged reward status in some manner where the achievements are plugged into the Challenge system. There will have to be a lot of stuff to figure out there but it sure would be nice to be able to do that for players.

In the old game they used the MARTy system for this. But because the reward rate was originally designed without a player economy in mind the high end of earning potential had to be set very high. And when tested, players ended up getting affected by MARTy by playing through standard content so they had to expand MARTy's upper bound. Then players hit the upper bound in the play [i] again with regular content and again the upper bound had to be changed. The result was an extremely high upper bound that allowed for great earning potential of all cumulative rewards (xp and inf) in normal and AE content.

Making a reward system that takes into consideration that a player economy exists will mean setting your bounds of reward in accordance with this in mind and being very careful to move it, if ever.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Segev has mentioned that

Segev has mentioned that random drops of recipes (or "craftable items" if you prefer) don't add any IGC to the economy per se, they actually sink it out. What if UGC only had as rewards some XP and some random drops of craftable items but no IGC at all?

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Foradain
Foradain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 3 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 21:06
Radiac wrote:
Radiac wrote:

Segev has mentioned that random drops of recipes (or "craftable items" if you prefer) don't add any IGC to the economy per se, they actually sink it out. What if UGC only had as rewards some XP and some random drops of craftable items but no IGC at all?

So, if the UGC player needs the cash, they put the recipes/craftable items/etc on the auction house, and the game takes the cut of whatever is paid, so a bit of a sink there, in addition to whatever sinks when the buyer actually makes the item.

Or they sell it to a vendor, which does add IGC to the economy, but if the vendor pays less than the usual auction price of the items, then they don't get as much IGC as they could have, and the vendor can put it on the auction house, and sink whatever it sells for. ^_^

Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
Foradain's Character Conclave
Millennium City Refugee.
Avatar courtesy of Satellite9

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
According to the NPC theory

According to the NPC theory Segev has been mentioning on this website in various places, the NPC vendors might even be getting all of THEIR IGC to buy stuff with from trading on the auction house. In other words, the NPCs aren't creating any IGC ex nihilo either, all of that ultimately comes from IGC drops from missions etc. At least it's possible to do it that way, from what I've read.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Cinnder
Cinnder's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 1 week ago
Gunterkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/26/2013 - 16:24
Segev wrote:
Segev wrote:

If you could, instead of using a farm to power-level, just spend IGC to auto-level, would that feel any "worse" than using the farm? If so, why?

I'm thinking that the problem with paying for levels is time-related. We want people to spend time playing the game. If they are subscribed, then the longer they play, the more money for MWM. If they aren't, then I suppose the thinking is the longer they play, the more chance that they will buy stuff in the Starmart -- and once again, 'Step 3: profit!' In addition, the presence of both types of player is good for making the game world seem alive. (Even if they are in one mission the whole time, they still might be participating in chat channels.)

If folks can buy levels, I'd be worried that CoT would lose out on most of the benefits listed above. I'd also worry that it might hasten someone's departure from the game. I understand some players want to get to level cap and then would happily play endgame stuff forever, but I'd expect there would also be a significant number of players who would feel they had 'played the whole game' when they got to cap and move on to something else.

Spurn all ye kindle.

Segev
Segev's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 month ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/04/2012 - 15:35
Notably, spending IGC (not

Notably, spending IGC (not Stars) to buy levels would still require some front-end investment of time. (I should note that I am not asking about this to advocate for it. I think it's probably a very bad idea. But I wanted others' views on it to see if I was missing anything.)

Making UGC "drops" all be lockboxed, whether lockbox keys are bought with Stars or IGC, would be a way to do what was suggested in making them only craftables. It's a similar net result: it won't matter how efficient the farm, because it costs something to actually gain the rewards of it, and so even if you get umpteen billion lockboxes, you have to expend resources to open them all. "Time" and "efficient level exploitation" are not the only resources required, at that point.

Doing it with craft items rather than with lockboxes might be more palateable.

Business Manager

Lutan
Lutan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 9 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 02/02/2014 - 15:08
I had a thought about those

I had a thought about those lockboxes...

If the non-combat powers are still a thing there could be some ways in them to open up certain lockboxes. Lockpicking could open conventional ones and hacking coul open code-locked ones etc. But you could only open a few of them per day and have to bring the rest of them to a NPC that opens them for a fee or sells keys. The droprate would be high enough that everyone has more lockboxes than he could open by himself though.

That way every player gets a taste of whats in them as an incentive to buy keys to get the contents faster.

Another thing I thought about would be to make random reward drops craftable. I would call it experementing and it would work by putting some crafting components and some IGC on the workbench and simply get a random reward for that.

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 5 days ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Lutan wrote:
Lutan wrote:

I had a thought about those lockboxes...
If the non-combat powers are still a thing there could be some ways in them to open up certain lockboxes. Lockpicking could open conventional ones and hacking coul open code-locked ones etc. But you could only open a few of them per day and have to bring the rest of them to a NPC that opens them for a fee or sells keys. The droprate would be high enough that everyone has more lockboxes than he could open by himself though.
That way every player gets a taste of whats in them as an incentive to buy keys to get the contents faster.
Another thing I thought about would be to make random reward drops craftable. I would call it experementing and it would work by putting some crafting components and some IGC on the workbench and simply get a random reward for that.

Probably not as the lock boxes themselves are not game world objects meant for interaction. They are a proxies stand-in for the random drop gained for some form of activity that per Segev's proposal would require a cost of some sort to unlock. I've already made clear my stance on this subject.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
For what it's worth, I think

For what it's worth, I think it might be an interesting idea to have some form of content that drops random craftable items but not IGC and another that drops IGC but not craftable items. Or maybe the second type still gives both. In any event, that MIGHT create an economy that can take care if itself in terms of inflation because at times when IGC starts to get too plentiful people will do more "craftables content" and at times when IGC is starting to run in low supply, they'd likely do more "IGC content". For what it's worth, I still like the idea of making all content drop craftable items regardless. You can't get enough IGC sinks after all. Also, you could mess with the XP rates of the two types of content.

What would be the difference in those two types of content though? I think clearly the "normal" content has to give some of everything. Apart from UGC the only other type of content that might be it's own thing in and of itself is "premium content" which would mean the kind you pay a sub or something to have access to. I can't see charging people money for a given type of content and then having that content NOT provide IGC and XP and random craftable drops, probably at better rates than the "regular" type. UGC is a possibility I guess. Maybe Task Forces could be better XP and better craftables content with little or no IGC generated? Maybe street sweeping doesn't drop IGC? I'm scratching my head on that part of it.

Edit: I suppose one thing you could do is have one type of content that drops IGC and craftables but not XP, and the other drop XP and craftables but not IGC. Again, which type of content get's what is another problem. Maybe the Premium Content you have to pay for (sub, Stars, whatever) drops all three, but drops like DOULBE the rate of craftables to keep it from being an inflationary influence.

Of course all of this is predicated on the idea that the crafting and whatever else you've got to sink IGC (NPCs playing the market and not paying out insane rates for crap items, etc) will be enough. That's the 2 billion INF question.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Question for Segev: In a

Question for Segev: In a world where the rate of IGC generation and the rate of consumption are about equal, one would expect the inflation rate to be zero. However, that economy COULD have like 10x as much IGC floating around as it really needs. Would the mere existence of that excess cash in the world be a problem? Or would it lead only to transient spikes in prices followed by an equilibrium of some kind?

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Segev
Segev's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 month ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/04/2012 - 15:35
If the IGC generation and

If the IGC generation and sink rates are roughly even, such that the IGC in existence remains roughly constant, then the only variation in prices of items would be based on the scarcity of those items. If an item spiked in price under that condition, it would mean that item had suddenly become much rarer than it was before, or that it had somehow become much more desirable than it was before (which amounts to the same thing: there are fewer of it available to buy, so there's more competition to obtain it amongst those with resources to bid it up).

There really isn't a "10x what it needs," unless "need" is considered a minimum value. I honestly don't know how to calculate what that minimum value would be, other than to comment that it is connected to how many players there are in game and is a function of how much IGC has to be out there for it to be considered a fine-grained fungible good. That is, there has to be "enough" IGC relative to the number of players that everybody has IGC. This particular state is more or less guaranteed by the traditional MMO model of IGC generation: anybody can go out and beat up enemies or do missions to gain "enough" IGC to meet and exceed that minimum need generated by that body's existence within the game.

The only problem caused by excessive amounts of IGC, assuming sink and generation rates are, as we've established for this thought experiment, equal, is the one CoH had: it creates a barrier to entry for the market.

Loads and loads of IGC creates a condition wherein market prices for goods are very high relative to the generation rate of IGC. This means newcomers to the system need to somehow leverage their way into the high market prices to get their first seed money if they want to play the market in a realistic fashion. It's too hard to get into it from scratch if the IGC they start with is generated by normal play mechanisms.

This suggests, to me, that if IGC gets too inflated, the FIRST thing that needs to be done is increase sinks, to overbalance the system. When IGC starts deflating due to the sinks pulling too much out, then either tone them back or increase the IGC generation rate.

So it seems your "10x what it needs" figure would be related to the creation rate more than anything else. It is a problem identifiable by the inability of newcomers to "break in" because the exchange of wealth happens at a level far greater than the generation rate. (All it takes for this to be a problem is for it to be prohibitive for the casual market-goer; if you have to be actively seeking to play the market to make use of it, it's a problem.) This COULD be solved by figuring out how to stabilize the generation and sink rates (as we state has been done for this thought experimet), and then simply multiplying all sinks and generators by 10 (assuming we're literally at 10x where we should be in terms of IGC generation).

Now, newcomers can accumulate what it takes to get to the levels the market hurls around, while the sink rate is still high enough to suck it out as fast as it comes in. But now, the big players find their sinks are much more massive...but their play generates enough to keep up...but their savings just aren't as great, ultimatey, as they were before. Not in real terms. They could spend it all a lot faster on sinks, and make it back a lot faster on non-market gameplay.

(The net result would be equivalent to if MWM just divided everybody's IGC stores by 10, but would probably be a bit better received since nobody's wealth is obviously directly impacted, and there's as much "good" as "bad" in that they get 10x as much per activity even if they have to spend 10x as much per sink.)

Business Manager

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Fascinating. (I'm serious,

Fascinating. (I'm serious, not being sarcastic when I say this)

I now feel like there ought to be some kind of end-game Incarnate-like content for the level-capped that does not drop a lot of IGC compared to the other content (maybe none at all) but drops higher rates of randomized item drops. That way the veterans can grind for "very rare purples" with that content, or they can grind for IGC doing something else (like traditional missions and TFs maybe). This way the veteran level-capped people aren't just always raking in the dough but rather have to decide what they want to try to optimize their play for (IGC or items). And again that might lead to a more self-regulating economy. Of course, the people leveling up a toon will still want XP, IGC, and items, and I wouldn't want to deny them that.

This of course assumes that when items in general get expensive, people will grind for items more, not grind for more IGC to buy items with. But I think markets are smart enough in that sense.

Given this, and the act that the game will have a market going from day 1, and the NPCs being more shrewd buyers and sellers of items (and not creating IGC ex nihilo), I now believe that item degradation may well be unnecessary, at least for the first few months of the game, maybe into year 2-3 even.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
IGC, if it represents

IGC, if it represents anything in the immersion context of the game, is probably supposed to represent not money per se but good will, influence, etc. That said, you could make the "no IGC" or "very low IGC" content some kind of SECRET missions you get sent on that nobody will ever know about, like black ops, or whatever. Maybe they don't affect your perceived alignment, even. You then still have the XP and item drops, just no IGC or very little IGC. You might even get some kind of merits or something specific to the faction that sent you on the mission, maybe. Then, when you go to spend those merits on items, it's either some kind of gamble-tron or some kind of "pay merits and IGC to get the specific item you want" type deal, sort of like B.O.T.L.E.R. in CoX.

Edit: And on the flip side you could have some other content that's "high visibility" like throwing out the first pitch at the baseball game, getting the key to the city, bodyguarding celebs, etc that gives more IGC.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Pages