Adeon Hawkwood
-
Posts
6270 -
Joined
-
I've performed drive by debuffing on occasion. Obviously only with buffs that deal no damage. The other fun one is on my tank on a couple of occasions when I've sene someone struggling I leap in and use my taunt aura to take all the aggro and then stand there while they beat them up.
-
Quote:Traps had a rocky start for defenders? I jumped in head first and haven't looked back.Originally Posted by Eiko-chan
I'm so glad to see the Defender community so embracing the glory of Traps after the rocky start it had. -
Quote:They are pretty much the same in Traps. Since the devs redid all of the pseudo-pets when they ported traps Defenders get reduced damage on their explosives (unlike Corruptors and Masterminds who got the blaster versions).Originally Posted by Dr_Impossible
What are peoples thoughts on Trip Mine and Time Bomb? My experience with those on me devices blasters was: I never took Time bomb, it seemed so unpractical after watching a slew of others flail around with it, I could be wrong. Trip Mine, while cool, took so long to set up even with max recharge SO's, it wasn't worth having around because I just wouldn't 'go to it' often enough.
Time Bomb is VERY situational (and annoyingly long to use). Trip Mine is more practical and makes a nice close in Defense. In general you'll like it more if you have one of the more single target oriented blast sets. -
This actually applies to pretty much all of the mez sets. Personally it's never really bothered me. My characters with mezzes are generally more concerned with Accuracy and Recharge than mez duration anyway but I can see why it might be annoying for some powersets.
-
Quote:There was some commentary from Castle a while back about designing the Hamidon Raid. Part of it came down to the fact that it is balanced around a 50 person raid group. If the zone limit were increased then Hami would need to be buffed to accommodate that. This would also make it harder to get a raid going.Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
Basically, the code would enforce a 'hamikini' effect on all players, meaning that, if it helped, the zone cap for Abyss and Hive could be raised to 100.
-
Quote:Not a particularly useful one though. A lot of ATs can solo AVs or GMs. In fact off the the top of my head I can recall examples from all ATs except Tanks and the EATs (and I'm pretty sure that most of the EATs can I just can't recall examples).Originally Posted by Fulmens
Actually, the first video on Youtube that I found was a Stormie doing it. I think someone posted a bunch of Traps videos as well in this very forum a while back. And I can't guarantee a Darkity can do it ... but I'd be amazed if they could not.
While four different Defender primaries soloing an AV is not a guarantee that "defenders are good enough" ... it's a data point. -
Quote:Well, adjusting for Tank scaling SR would give 26% base defense or about 40.5% fully enhanced along with a certain amount of resistances at low health (not sure how much these help). For comparison a Shield Defense Tanker gets 20% defense (31.2% enhanced) plus 15% resistance to all but psionics (23.4% enhanced) and 10% more hit points (19.5% with slotting).Originally Posted by AzureSkyCiel
Plus, remember that defense is centered around an average chance to get hit, and considering the numbers a tank usually draws in, SR might even be somewhat of a weak set for tanks.
My experience is that while Shield Defense Tankers are tough enough for most things they are somewhat susceptible to burst damage and Super Reflexes would only enhance that tendency. The primary advantage of SR over SD is that it is easier to softcap (in fact an SR tank would be almost there with SOs) but when IOing it is stupidly easy to get defense bonuses while good resistance bonuses are rare.
Finally I think an SD Tanker would out damage an SR tanker. It basically comes down to the damage from AAO and Shield Charge to the 30% recharge bonus from quickness. -
Quote:Yep. What I would be interested to know is how this interacts with power customization. We know that it is possible for the devs to make alternate animations that you can choose to use for given powers. The question is, can the devs make these alternate animations use different stances? Obviously this doesn't solve the problem of needing multiple animations but it would solve the one stance per power issue in specific cases where that was warranted without affecting balance for those who don't.Originally Posted by Jade_Dragon
Yes, but Brawl has to be specifically coded, that way, and the devs have stated that Brawl breaks all the rules, to the point where it is the most complex attack in the game.
Obviously it is POSSIBLE, because as I said, Shield is able to do it. Whether or not that is due to a kludge, though, because Sheild is able to take advantage of the ability to use a limited number of stances, or what, I do not know. But from what I understand this is a limitation of the ENGINE. The devs can code around it, but they can't get rid of the restriction.
I suppose BaBs could clarify if I am wrong. It would be a lot simpler to just recode Devices so it can be used in multiple stances, instead of them all. But as you say, if that requires four animations per power, one for each of four different stances, instead of just two, well, that's a lot more work, and impossible if the maximum number of stances for one power is only two or three. (And remember that flying uses up a stance as well) -
Quote:This isn't true. The one stance per power is used to reduce the required animations and sequencing rather than a limit of the system. Brawl is the best example of this. It plays a different animation depending on what stance you are in. The best example of this is to get a character with a stance that uses both hands (Archery, Dual Blades, Claws or Shield and a Weapon). If you have his weapons out then brawl will be a kick animation but if you clear the stance so he puts away his weapons and then initiate combat with brawl he will punch instead.Originally Posted by Jade_Dragon
Yeah, that's the problem. While thematically and conceptually it works, technically it's not possible. You MUST have a single stance for a power, you can't have "do this if you have a weapon, do this if you don't." Either you have a weapon, which requires you draw it if you don't have it out when you activate the power, or you don't. As long as that limitation exists in the game engine, any resolution to the problem is merely a kludge.
This is pretty much what I was suggesting a few posts ago. I don't mind if a manipulation set has a weapon that makes sense for the set and I don't mind if that weapon happens to use a stance that eliminates redraw for a blaster primary. But, I don't really want a set that uses a stance (with or without a weapon) purely so that it doesn't cause redraw. It's also important to note that the three Blaster Weapon sets (Dual Pistols, Assault Rifle and Archery) all have a different stance so making a set that is redraw-less with all three is impossible.Quote:Which is why I actually suggested adding a weapon that would have to be redrawn if the Primary DIDN'T have a weapon. Although it would be irritating to constantly redraw the Secondary weapon, the players wouldn't have a precedent to say, "remove the redraw from my favorite Set". Besides, Trick Arrow/Energy for Defenders, or Fire/Trick Arrow for Controllers forces a redraw when you use the Trick Arrows, and there is very little complaint about that. Because using the bow as a launching platform for the debuffs makes conceptual sense. -
Quote:I'll admit I'm not as knowledgeable as some others regarding animations but I don't think that would work. For shields they basically put in another "stance" which was compatible with existing stances. So they'd have to do the same thing here and unless they put in a toggle you'd actually drop out of the stance after using one of the pwoers meaning it would cause more redraw problems than not doing it.Originally Posted by konshu
Honestly, animations and powers are two of my least knowledgeable areas.
But my thought was that whatever was done to get MA working with Shields might be sufficient to get it working with the 3 blaster weapons (that's counting the DP set that's on its way).
It's not a case of what players want, it's a case of what the devs want. The purpose of manipulation sets is poorly defined by them (probably deliberately) but they are not the same as melee sets. Besides the changes to the powers themselves (primarily higher damage and longer recharge) the structure of the sets is very different. Even the most melee heavy set (Energy Manipulation) only has 5 melee attacks of which two are basically pure controls with minimal damage. Manipulation sets are filled out with other powers. Primarily control powers, self buffs and the occasional damage aura. Electricity Manipulation has the most damaging melee attacks but even it only has 4 of them.Quote:As for adapting the powers, I think most if not all of the MA set could be used as is. There's an immob power, a stun, a build up, a kb, a pbaoe ... I'm not sure what else players would want. -
Quote:It's a fair point and I think it's something that everyone is going to have a different opinion on. My personal take on it (which I fully expect some people will disagree with) is that if you were mutated by an outside source then it is either Science or Magic. If the supernatural is involved then it's Magic, else it's Science even if there is no overt experiment involved.Originally Posted by LittleDavid
Passing thought, but--I wonder where that leaves the people who mutate WITHOUT having been born with mutated genes. For example, the Science origin says this:
This seems to imply that Science-origin heroes either gain their powers from a purposeful scientific experiment, or through an accident when a scientific experiment goes out of control (like Spider-Man did in his original origin story).
But wouldn't there be cases of people whose genes/bodies are mutated by circumstances outside of a scientific experiment, purposeful or awry? For example, one scientist in the Rogue Isles claims that there are is no evidence of Mutation-origin heroes from before the development of nuclear weapons.
If someone is exposed to a mutagenic substance and wasn't directly involved in a scientific experiment concerning that substance--like, say, the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, whose origin story usually involves careless disposal of a mutagen--wouldn't that qualify them as part of the Mutant origin, rather than Science?
For example: Steven Ulysses Perhero is exploring the surface of an alien world when he finds some green goo which exists naturally on that world. He touches it and BAM! his genes change giving him super powers. Now you could select all sorts of origins for him but per my discription above I would class him as Science. Partly because he doesn't really fit elsewhere but mostly because there was a scientific experiment performed in an attempt to answer the question "I wonder what will happen if I touch that green goo?" -
Quote:The softcap is 45% since that is the point where most enemies have their change of hitting you at the minimum possible.Originally Posted by AzureSkyCiel
Forgive me, then perhaps I have been mistaken, but what would you confer to be the soft-cap. This is something that's been hazy with me for a long time, and I fail to see how the base of 13.88% defense (18.50% for the AT in question) would make the soft-cap. Though this also fails to factor SOs, and I recall having a devil of a time achieving what I believe was the soft-cap when building my SR scrapper (/I thought/ it was around the 40th percentiles). Also, SR itself is a rather tight build that demands almost all powers in the set and seems to lack survivability beyond defense, something other armors sets lack.
Anyway though, I apologize for rambling on this subject, in many ways, I am very much a noob, now and forever. -
Quote:But it doesn't solve the redraw issue unless they make three new sets of animations for all of the attacks.Originally Posted by konshu
I think the best solution for blasters troubled by redraw is to create a Martial Arts secondary.
Martial Arts fits with AR, Archery, and Dual Pistols themes; basically, anyone who has redraw problems. It has an immob attack, a stun, a build up, an aoe attack ... a lot of the elements you'd expect in a secondary. Just re-arrange the powers a bit, adjust some of the properties to fit the usual mold, and maybe add a power or two if needed.
I predict it would be a popular secondary.
The other issue is how to do it? The most popular suggestions seem to be either an Energy Manipulation clone or Devices with kicking instead of explosives but personally I don't care for either. -
Quote:You are correct, I was remembering a post by BABs where he discussed stances and I thought they were the same stance, but now that I re-read the post I realize they aren't. Archery is actually Lefthanded stance which is a subset of the Dual Wield stance so it's closest to Katanas in terms of animation reuse.Originally Posted by Jade_Dragon
I think the question is, is the rifle, the bow, and the dual pistols different stances, or is it a "weapon" stance, and the weapon itself is what is different? If that's the case then in theory I think it could work. It is not that you have a specific weapon, but that you HAVE a weapon. In theory, you could eliminate redraw beween Assault Rifle and Trick Arrow IF you could choose the same model for both. (A machinegun/bow hybrid?)
OTOH, there does appear to be subtle difference between the gait and movements of a character with the different weapons. I would guess that single handed weapon and dual weilded weapons are two different stances, just to start. There is enough variation in the idle and run animations for that. And some of the bugs with Ninja Run did seem to suggest that Claws, Assault Rifle, and other weapons were being held in individual stances while that power was active, or at least they NEEDED to be held somewhat differently, even if they weren't. Not knowing how that was resolved, I honestly can't say.
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showp...0&postcount=26
The problem with that is that it's non-obvious and hurts non-weapon sets. For people who don't have a weapon the set will animate slower and unless they are the sort of people who spend time discussing this on the forumQuote:I'm trying to get away from that, though. My suggestions are meant to try and fit the "workarounds" for redraw into the existing system. Stay within the idea of "one power, one stance". Perhaps the "weapon" could be invisible, though, so if you don't have one in your Primary, it doesn't seem to effect you, except for the pauses to "redraw". Or, maybe the weapon could be generic, like a staff that you just hold, almost as a costume piece. 
they won't know why which will make them think that a particular set is clunky and/or buggy.
The difference is that for both Trick Arrow and Shields the situation is an inherent requirement for the powerset. In their case the stance is a requirement for the set and is designed to work as smoothly as possible with other sets that use the same or different stances. Conversely adding a manipulation set that is specifically designed to work smoothly with Archery but doesn't really feature a bow raises the question of why that set and not the others.Quote:Well, in reference to redraw I hope that's not true. I mean, they didn't have to make it so Archery and Trick Arrow used the "same weapon". They could have made it so you redrew every time you switched from an Archery Power to a Trick Arrow power, whether you had the bow out at all. That would be "fair" to the other sets, which do force a redraw when you switch. Particularly when you are switching from, say the assault rifle to the bow.
I think we all recognize on some level that that is inconsistent, yet I haven't heard many protest about it. I think we all prefer not having the redraw when the weapon is the same, rather than trying to eliminate redraw for all the weapons.
You probably mean that if you had multiple animations depending on your stance we'd demand it for all sets, but again, we've already gone through that with Shield. So it is possible. The question is, how long are we willing to wait for it, how many other things are we willing to put on the back burner while the animation guys work on reanimating every single Power in the game, multiple times, and where do we start, do we take it in stages or try and do it all at once. Do we wait the time needed to do it all at once? Can we be that patient, or is it even worth it to wait that long on something that we're dealing with fine right now?
Now there are a handful of cases where I think this sort of change would make sense thematically and I have no problems with it there*. But if the devs make a manipulation set that works smoothly with Archery I'd expect to see some logical reason for it other than "we want a set that works well with Archery". Sorry if this sounds a bit odd, I'm having a hard time explaining my feelings on this.
*The example I like to use here is an option for Web Grenade and Smoke Grenade for Devices and Traps to be able to be fired from an Assault Rifle. In this case it makes sense thematically: we can fire Explosive Grenades and Sleep Grenades from our Assault Rifles but for some reasons we have to throw Web and Smoke Grenades by hand? I doubt we'll ever see it but that is the sort of change I'd like to see, it makes sense thematically and only applies to those powers in the set where that is the case. -
Quote:From what I understand to do this they would have to use the same system that Brawl uses. Basically they brute-force it and it selects a different animation to play based on your stance. The problem is this is still a generic animation that accounts for the fact that you have a weapon but not necessarily which one (the initial version of Ninja Run with an Assault rifle is a good example of the problems that this can run into).Originally Posted by Jade_Dragon
I've suggested a "Weapon" Manipulation Set for Blasters, where if you have a weapon you pull it out and use it to pummel your foes. The other powers can be made to work with the weapon out as well. The problem is that you HAVE to have a weapon, so if you choose a Primary that doesn't have a weapon, you'd have to be given one. Maybe it could give you a choice of different types of weapons, like a sword or a club.
The problem is, I don't believe it would be possible to make the "generic weapon" from the Secondary match up with a "specific weapon" from the Primary. If it was, it would be cool, you could like use the butt of the Assault Rifle, the "blade" of the Archery Bow, or (with GR) the hilt of the Dual Pistols. The problem is that 1) that's three different animations, and you can't have different animations depending on which weapon is out. And 2) most likely you can't have the same power draw either of three different weapons anyway.
Well, with powerset customization the devs MIGHT be able to make it a set of alternate animations for the powers although the interface would probably be clunky. The main issue is that it would require a lot of animations. Even if we assume that the unarmed uses the regular MA animations and that the Bow and Assault Rifle animations are the same animation just with different sequencing (basically need to select a hand position where neither the bow or AR will clip and use that) it still means 6 new animations per power (not to mention all the sequencing and power customization effort) so I unfortunately doubt we'll see it. Besides, if they did it for one set we'd demand it for all setsQuote:I've also thought of using a Martial Arts style animation, which would eliminate 1), since you could kick with a weapon in your hand using the exact same animation. But it gets back to 2) If the engine doesn't support that, you'd have to have three different Power Sets, one that draws the Assault Rifle when you kick, one that draws the Bow, and one that draws the Dual Pistols. Plus a fourth for Martial Artists that don't want to have to draw some weapon. 
.
-
The best inf sinks would be high value cosmetic prestige items (like motorcycles in WoW). The problem is that the nature of the CoX player base means that cosmetic rewards are often the most highly sort after ones.
-
Quote:Agreed, marketeers are overpowered.Originally Posted by Fury Flechette
I both farm and play the market but in terms of making influence marketing is far more efficient, and doesn't require any farming capable character.
-
Quote:You need to open it up and copy over the information that doesn't exist in the other one. However once you've gotten them combined you can keep a master copy and copy that one back and forth to make it easier (hint: batch files are your friend here).Originally Posted by JeetKuneDo
Awesome. Sounds like a minor bit of work, but that will pretty much solve the problem.
Just to clarify, I would copy the entire file over as an additional file to the one that already exists in that username file? I was assuming I would just open it up and copy over information the other one doesn't have and vise-versa. -
Quote:They are talking about other internet forums since here your game account is your forum account. Given the stupidly high numbers of sites that require you to have a password a lot of people will use the same one for many of them. Now for things where there's nothing at stake (i.e. internet forums) this is fine since you're unlikely to care if someone steals your account to some random internet site. But for anything important (i.e. anything where money is involved) you should have a unique password.Originally Posted by Canine
The problem I've got is that ^.
It's possible I'm being stupid and have missed something obvious, but I was under the impression that we have no choice but to use the same password for both the game forums and game account...
To answer the OP yes I think bots would still be against the rules. Largely for the reason that Katie V stated: poor MMO design. A lot of MMOs (especially older ones but some newer ones to) have an intensive grind which is bottable. In that sort of MMOs the devs would need to ban bots for pretty much the same reasons that they do now. First off players would complain about others getting an unfair advantage due to the use of bots and secondly to reduce server load so that those actually playing have a better experience (and less competition for mining nodes and the like).
Last year EVE implemented a program to help ban a large number of RMTers and other botters. At the time they posted an article discussing the server load before and after the ban, unfortunately I can't find a link but the crux of it was that bots accounted for an extremely high percentage of the server load in relation to the percentage of users online that they actually represented. -
Well, the redraw is going to be a problem with this one. In general weapon based melee attacks are bad for blasters since they use melee attacks infrequently so having the longer activation time is annoying.
However, my main problem with this is that it is an extremely limited concept set. Most sets are a skill set and allow you to chose the concept for the character. This one is basically forcing you into at least a semi-official policeman concept (especially Reinforcements which would also be OP on a blaster IMHO).
Personally I'd much prefer to see a PPD character made as an Epic AT rather than trying to shoehorn it into a powerset for an existing AT. -
Quote:How exactly would this differ from martial arts?Originally Posted by Joe_Schmoe
Street Fighting
-
Quote:Ok, I see what you're getting at now. Put that way it does make sense. Brute/Tankers/Scrappers/Stalkers have inherent powers that enhance their difference but Defenders/Corruptors don't (well Corruptors do but Defenders don't).Originally Posted by Talionis
When you get to comparing Defenders and Corrupters. The numbers are different, yes, but the Inherents aren't. Corrupters have more damage. Defenders have better buff and debuff. Corrupters inherent helps them do more damage. Defenders inherent basically does nothing.
-
Quote:Well personally I've have put the posi in M30 but as stated above I don't care for Ignite.Originally Posted by Cainus
Well, I guess it at least gives me a place to slot that 5th Posi set...
And, with Tar Patch/Tenticles down from the Dark/AR defender that he's Pacted with, it should make it quite a bit more effective. -
Quote:Like most blasters I use my build up before a fight not in the middle. Ok, I was mostly being sarcastic.Originally Posted by CptShwan
Must be nice to be able to stop in the middle of a fight for 5 seconds uninterrupted to lay down a mine, or wait 5 seconds every mob to lay one down.
-
The problem that both Kin/AR and Kin/Archery have is the redraw. Other than that they are both quite good. AR is one of the best (if not THE best) blast set for AoE and Kin is the best set for boosting damage. Therefore a Kin/AR will be anice high damage AoE defender. Assuming you don't go mad from redraw.