A vast majority of the Strongholds community agrees on the point that our current companions are not mannequins as each character is limited to two or three companions that when equipped they actually show all the armor they wear. The rest of companions have no use for this purpose. Another point is that they usually have their own personalised armor and people don't necessarily want to equip them with a set that doesn't fit their role/profession just in order to use them as a decoration while you need them at the same time for questing. Eg., Mako with Malak's set or Elara Dorne with Revan's set.

 

I have a suggestion for the mannequins if their absence is caused by having no engine possibility to implement them as objects with an interactive gear panel. At least I presume it's the reason why Bioware didn't introduce armor stands when it's one of the coolest elements of housing.

 

They could be added as companions without any abilities on a new tab in the companion panel. This way we could use Character Panel for gearing them up and put them on hooks like we do with regular companions. Each could be unlocked by either credits or CC

 

They wouldn't be available to summon in a regular way. We don't want to see people accompanied by walking mannequins, right? It would be required to visit your Stronghold and use Character Panel there which would work just like it works currently on the ship (it allows to view equipment of all companions).

 

Although they would be still seen as holograms when we relog to another character, we would get a wide variety of armor stands that can be equipped with any kind of armor. This would be fine by me.

 

What's your thoughts guys? Do you think Bioware didn't think about mannequins before or it's "technically challenging"?

Edited July 21, 2014 by PavSalco

I would hazard a guess that mannequins really did not occur to them for some reason. Because even they have to realize how limited companions are for this task.

to where it is s to where it is so hard you can't put it in th you can't put it in the game if you can add homes for characters and you can certainly add little statues or little glass cases to display all my pieces I really want to have terracotta warriors or at least something like that in my stronghold making up charac making up characters and deleting them just to get copies of the free armor just so I could have 18 Troopers in my stronghold like a little army it would just be nice if they did not look lik it would just be nice if they did not look like holograms like a place I got this idea from the Warriors storyline wh I got this idea from the Warriors storyline when you finally get your lightsaber and I still want this to happen

 

Also I mention about the hologram thing because that's what the developers mentioned how this was going to look in one of their videos. If we are stuck with armor stands that look like holograms they will just look like an army o they will just look like an army of ghosts

one idea, and it's a long term solution that won't be perfect is to tie armor stands to collections and or acheivements. you unlock an armor via collections, and part of the collections stuff gives you a armor stand decoration of the set. it's something that can be slowly phased in with new sets

you unlock an armor via collections, and part of the collections stuff gives you a armor stand decoration of the set. it's something that can be slowly phased in with new sets

That's an interesting suggestion, but if I understand correctly then you're restricted to use only the sets which you fully unlocked in the collections. You wouldn't be able to customise them as what it does is spawning a pre-made armor stand that cannot be edited.

A vast majority of community

 

You lost me right there.

 

The vast majority of the community doesnt come anywhere near the forums, and some of us couldnt give a **** about housing in general never mind all the silly esoteric demands you and a few other housing zealots keep making.

 

If you have a suggestion to make about a feature, take it to the suggestion forum, dont come on general and claim to speak on behalf of the silent (and largely ignorant) majority.

The vast majority of the community doesnt come anywhere near the forums, and some of us couldnt give a **** about housing in general never mind all the silly esoteric demands you and a few other housing zealots keep making.

You're such a wonderful person. I will hug you and let your anger go away

I've changed it to "the Strongholds community" which is true as lots of people ask for the proper armor stands in the CM suggestions for the Strongholds.

I've changed it to "the Strongholds community" which is true as lots of people ask for the proper armor stands in the CM suggestions for the Strongholds.

 

So....post in one of those threads?

The simplest things are 'technically challenging' for either this team or this engine (flip a coin).

 

That said, it's also entirely possible they just didn't consider people might want to display armor in their house. I mean, it's possible none of them ever played SWG too (where such things were commonplace and housing was incredibly well done...in a Star Wars environment, too).

 

I dunno, I really try to stay positive but after GSF not coming anything close to JTL, I have doubts that Strongholds will come close to what we had in another now dead Star Wars MMO. Yea yea, sue me if my expectations are too high because of SOE (if that isn't funny, I don't know what is).

Edited July 21, 2014 by hadoken

The simplest things are 'technically challenging' for either this team or this engine (flip a coin).

 

apparently things that you assume are "simple" aren't. "technically challenging" can mean lots of things. It can be technically challenging to add in 16man group finder, not that its hard to change 8 to 16, but more to account for the lag and extra processing on the back end of queue handling.

 

It can be technically challenging to add individual armors to collections mainly due to the excessive storage requirements and load times.

 

The challenge may not be in the implementation of said feature, but in the impact on the load times and performance from said feature.

 

But sure, go with its the engine/lazy devs excuse.

But sure, go with its the engine/lazy devs excuse.

 

I'm not the one making that excuse - they are.

I'm not the one making that excuse - they are.

 

no, they say its 'technically challenging' you take it as a an engine/lazy excuse. There is a difference.

 

The former is a realistic short version of "while we understand this is wanted, we don't feel that the cost (effort, unintended impact, money, man hours etc) is worth the return."

 

where as the latter is your opinion as "well they could but either they don't know how (i.e incompetent), don't want to (lazy), or can't because <unintelligible techno gibberish about the engine>

no, they say its 'technically challenging' you take it as a an engine/lazy excuse. There is a difference.

 

The former is a realistic short version of "while we understand this is wanted, we don't feel that the cost (effort, unintended impact, money, man hours etc) is worth the return."

 

where as the latter is your opinion as "well they could but either they don't know how (i.e incompetent), don't want to (lazy), or can't because <unintelligible techno gibberish about the engine>

 

Really, you translate "technically challenging" to mean "fiscally unsound"?

 

The things I learn on this forum...

Really, you translate "technically challenging" to mean "fiscally unsound"?

 

The things I learn on this forum...

 

yes, technically challenging to do on any reasonable time frame or cost to justify implementing said feature.

 

you can get it cheap, quickly, robust. Pick 2, sometimes only 1.

 

something can be technically challenging due to how much it would cost given current technology to implement.

it can be technically challenging to get it completed in a timely fashion and not waste lots of money chasing a goose egg. It can be challenging for one or two people to complete quickly/cheaply.

 

Everything costs money, and time is money. The longer something takes, the more it costs. It may not be difficult, but it may just take time and pure level of effort. It also may have additional unintended consequences that impact something else that would take time/effort to investigate/fix.