Rajani Isa

[ QUOTE ]
They have known that multi-enhancements boost things not directly slottable since HO's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes & No - I recall having my scrapper's melee attacks extended in range

But they patched that, and probably mostly forgot about it. None of the powers previously exploited or bugged so were pet powers - the part they knew about since i7 or so was caster buffs, not the enhancements bit.

And nice sig - [ QUOTE ]
Said they would NOT go back and give the SoW treatment to existing powers. HUNDREDS are being set to ignore recharge. Ok with that?

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, misleading - not to hundreds of powers. And real smooth linking to Red Tomax's Dev Digest Database - did you actually READ what you linked to?

And the SoW treatment is using locked recharge as a core part of the balancing - not as a fix for various AI ills.

[ QUOTE ]

I didn't have insider beta knowlegdge from 2? years ago

[/ QUOTE ]

And I wasn't expecting you to - if you notice the full line where I mention it was in beta :

[ QUOTE ]
This comes from me being in CoV Beta however

[/ QUOTE ]

And as far as this :

[ QUOTE ]
Finally if RIP sets weren't intended to make pets attack faster how was adding them to the game exasperating the problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's that, in part, now that they are working, it will make it worse (since the recharge in multiaspect IOs, etc, does get passed on to pets). Also, IIRC, while it was not working, the pets THOUGHT it was, thus contributing to the "wait for it to recharge/spam one attack" issue that some pets were having relating to recharge times.

[ QUOTE ]
So now you are basically stating that the damage output of Masterminds cannot be increased through recharge, yet all other ATs can.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your personal powers still benefit. And for some AT's direct damage has never been their primary stick.

As a /dark MM, DK and Tar Patch are two HUGE parts of your survivability, Tar Patch your damage.

And they have mentioned that, without doing a huge rebuild of various systems, the only other way to have it really work right would increase the CPU usage of ALL powers, pet and player alike, by 50%.

[ QUOTE ]

Of course the alternative is re-deciding that the "problem" they have known about, wasnt a problem and has been perfectly acceptable for 7 issues still isnt a problem or causing any problems in game except in castles imagination and spreadsheets which are not representative of the game in play

[/ QUOTE ]

If you read Castle's posts carefully, you notice that he says that while they were aware of it, when it first came out it was not noticeable in the data mining. Combining the fact that it has become so, with the AI issue some pets have, it has reached the point where the pain of fixing it is not more than the pain of not fixing it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Recharge intensive pet sets. I understood that these were created to increase the firing rate of the pets that they were accepted into. What exactly is their purpose now?

[/ QUOTE ]

That was never my understanding of what these sets were created to do. They are to increase the recharge rate of the summon power for the pet.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people have varying understandings of these sets and the soulbound allegiance set and how they were intended to affect pets.

Does anyone have the dev info when these were implemented. And if that info does indicate that ONLY the summon recharge time was supposed to benefit and never the pet was there any dev followup done to stem the tide of posts indicating the belief that RIP and SA did improve pet performance?

edit: this is all I could find in the patch notes regarding RIP and I could find no dev comments what so ever
dec 2, 2008

Added new IO Sets and new IO Set Categories:

# Recharge Intensive Pets

* Call to Arms, Level 10-30
* Expedient Reinforcement, Level 30-50

So I guess we were completely left to make up our own minds about what they actually did? (anyone find anything else?)

[/ QUOTE ]

First thing is I, personally, never expected recharge to improve a pet's attack rate - not in enhancement slotting, anyway. This comes from me being in CoV Beta however - they removed the ability to slot recharge from Henchmen due to not wanting misunderstandings as to what was buffed (the pet power's recharge rate, not the pet's attacks recharge rate.

Second, If you looked at the title of the IO sets and noticed the only powers that take them were the pet powers with long recharges, and not henchmen, I thought it was easy to figure that it was for the summons' recharge.

[ QUOTE ]
"Increases attack rate" can easily be interpreted to mean that the pet's attack rate is being increased by slotting the IO. The people who thought this was a normal, expected result of slotting the IO didn't need to execute an epic logical long-jump to reach their conclusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I recall, pretty much EVERY -O reads that way - and in every instance it increase how often the player's power recharges.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The ability to slot def/rech in Mind Link is not a bug. It was known throughout Beta and is working as intended, IIRC.

[/ QUOTE ]
Honest, curious question here: If having recharge slotted in Mind Link is acceptable by the devs, why doesn't it just accept recharge enhancements directly?

This leads to complicated and confusing scenarios like the one with the pets, where you can slot recharges into them and they get the benefit, but that's not working as intended so they change it.

I don't want to wake up one day and find that my ML recharge time is fixed at 240 seconds when I worked to have it perma (and I'm rather squishy without it being perma, considering low HP, no RES, no heal).

[/ QUOTE ]

Stuff like this is part of why people are upset. The dev team throws out stuff with no internal consistency.

The went on the record saying it was ok to sneak rech into ML for f-sake, but apparently that is NOT ok in a different group of powers.

I have no desire for ML to be nerfed at all, they should just change it to accept normal rech.

A lack of consistency from them and decisions that make me question their thought processes just leave a bad taste.

[/ QUOTE ] If they let Mind Link take normal recharge enhancements, it WOULD be nerfed. It was desinged to allow recharge buffs, and as a known side affect due to how the system works, franken-os would also work. The only way for them to block the multiaspect IO would be for them give it the SoW treatment - at which point hasten and other global recharge buff would not affect it.
IIRC.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it hard to believe that the power is too powerful if allowed to use generic IOs but not if you use the more powerful set IOs.

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as pure recharge is concerned, Set IOs do not buff more (except possibly through set bonuses, but there are ways to simulate that) than pure recharge SOs/IOs.

And you are asking them to balance around IOs! It's balanced against SOs & buffs, so it's fine.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The ability to slot def/rech in Mind Link is not a bug. It was known throughout Beta and is working as intended, IIRC.

[/ QUOTE ]
Honest, curious question here: If having recharge slotted in Mind Link is acceptable by the devs, why doesn't it just accept recharge enhancements directly?

This leads to complicated and confusing scenarios like the one with the pets, where you can slot recharges into them and they get the benefit, but that's not working as intended so they change it.

I don't want to wake up one day and find that my ML recharge time is fixed at 240 seconds when I worked to have it perma (and I'm rather squishy without it being perma, considering low HP, no RES, no heal).

[/ QUOTE ]

Stuff like this is part of why people are upset. The dev team throws out stuff with no internal consistency.

The went on the record saying it was ok to sneak rech into ML for f-sake, but apparently that is NOT ok in a different group of powers.

I have no desire for ML to be nerfed at all, they should just change it to accept normal rech.

A lack of consistency from them and decisions that make me question their thought processes just leave a bad taste.

[/ QUOTE ] If they let Mind Link take normal recharge enhancements, it WOULD be nerfed. It was desinged to allow recharge buffs, and as a known side affect due to how the system works, franken-os would also work. The only way for them to block the multiaspect IO would be for them give it the SoW treatment - at which point hasten and other global recharge buff would not affect it.
IIRC.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2 Phantasms, 2 Dark Servants, 9-12 Imps I think...oh how fire control was really crazy

[/ QUOTE ]

My Ill/Rad used to have three phantasms with three decoys, partially overlapping perma-PA, and however many spectral terrors I felt like at the time concurrently.

I think a speedy fire controller could get 15 imps out at once at least for a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, IIRC, back then Imps were 2-4 imps per cast, so if they could get four casts, and where lucky, 16.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I referred to this as the GPN, the Global Pet Nerf myself in one of the locked threads.

[/ QUOTE ]

GPN V2. GPN V1 was when the ability to summon multiples of the same pet with sufficient recharge was removed for a lot of pet types. (But not all, apparently)

[/ QUOTE ]

Which ones? The only one I can think of that might be there would be Warshades, but their pet requires you kill things first, as well. Which is unique.

[/ QUOTE ]
It used to be possible to summon multiple controller pets.

[/ QUOTE ]I know - I wasclose to fluffy when that change happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And yet ED turned out to be a benefit to the game in the long run. Those who will not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Opinionative, you have no idea what tha game would ahve done had ED not arrived in the form it did. Its an opinion I share though, I too think ED was best for the game.

However developers are not infaliable seers with powers to identify what is best for the game longevity, after all look what SOE did with SWG. The decimated their subscription base and never recovered, they had to rescind a refund offer because of the amount of people returning the trials of obi-wan. Whats really funny is that before Jack left he stated in an interview that what SOE did with SWG was right for the game, mind boggling..... with all evidence of how to destroy a games player base before him he still thought it was a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

The issue with SOE and SWG is, the NGE came out right after the Trials of Obi-Wan, invalidating TOW. That would be like having a superbooster that gave us bonuses for 6-slotting the same kind of SO enhancement (Damage, etc), say 6 Damage getting you a set bonus equal to a single SO Accuracy enhancement, the month or so before ED.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I referred to this as the GPN, the Global Pet Nerf myself in one of the locked threads.

[/ QUOTE ]

GPN V2. GPN V1 was when the ability to summon multiples of the same pet with sufficient recharge was removed for a lot of pet types. (But not all, apparently)

[/ QUOTE ]

Which ones? The only one I can think of that might be there would be Warshades, but their pet requires you kill things first, as well. Which is unique.

[ QUOTE ]
We need to keep in mind this is a game, and ultimately, players enjoyment (and continued subscriptions) are the goal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when does your sub mean more than mine?

With the characters I have, and how I play, I only benefit from this. You, apparently, do not. Maybe we will be able to convince the devs of some pet attack recharge buffs, but just because you do not like it all the results, or at least prefer the current live state, doesn't mean everyone will.

[ QUOTE ]
Because people who think fandom is a crime are dimwits.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is the opinion most people have of Marvel's litigation stance.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But it isn't any copyright that blocks use of the name, it's Trademark - while somewhat similar, it is a very distinct and very different thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, what blocks the use of the name is a text filter made by the CoH devs.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<QR>

Phoenix is a mythical creature that's been around for a LONG time, since the Egyptian times. It's also the name of a city and various sporting groups. Kinda hard to call that one "copyrighted."

Gambit, however, is a little more of a clear cut case. It's a word, no special history applied to it. A chess tactic, a sacrifice to obtain a better position. Pretty much able to be copyrighted as a name for somebody, but not as a word. Still, that's what we have the "Report for objectionable content" button for.

Edited slightly for clarity... I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]
You misunderstand copyright law. For example, "wolverine" is the name of an animal and cannot be owned by any company for commercial purposes. However, it is indeed owned within the restrictive domain of a comic superhero. So if you want to create a store called "Wolverine Groceries" you could and there's no infringement, but if you want to create a superhero named Wolverine, that's trouble. It's that type of domain restriction that makes it OK for one company to own the name Pioneer Electronics and another to own Pioneer Chicken. No possible market confusion.

So the use of both Pheonix and Gambit are protected when it comes to superhero characters, but not other uses.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya, that's pretty much what I said in my post from the start, just not as verbosely. I said it can be copyrighted as names, but not as a word. Meaning, Marvel can copyright the Cajun character with the ability to charge objects and throw them, etc. with the name Gambit, but can't copyright the word.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it isn't any copyright that blocks use of the name, it's Trademark - while somewhat similar, it is a very distinct and very different thing.

[ QUOTE ]
*looks around for Tina Fey and Jimmy Fallon*

[/ QUOTE ] That is what the MA is for, after all, isn't it?

[ QUOTE ]
1) Player-created NPCs will have same size limits as existing player-characters. However, you will have access to some (though not all initially) of the current NPCs. You can't edit their appearance, but apparently you can rename them and possibly give them new powers.

[/ QUOTE ]

We will not be able to edit (although we can use) existing NPCs. This has to do with how their "bodies" are built - Castle's example was giving Behemoths energy blasts might animate fine - or they might shoot out of the things chest.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have to admit I don't care about a lack of a map editor if I have 1,000 map choices now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah but there are only a few that are unique. Otherwise it's the same crap over and over

[/ QUOTE ]

And is the same stuff the devs have been working with. From what I've gotten over the years, the devs don't have a map editor program, as proven by the maps (especially that warehouse room with the side area) that used to always have the "veil of obscuring" over some of the hall connections.

Good chance is, when they get a good easy-to-use map editor, we will too, now.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What about this then, as sort of a compromise? How about letting us finally get account based storage like all the other MMO's have. Do this for salvage, enhancements, recipes so we dont have to form personal super groups or get a second account to get the most out of the invention system. Any chance we can get this?

[/ QUOTE ]

You already have it, it is called a Solo Base. (well except for the recipies but you just build those into IOs)

[/ QUOTE ]Didnt you read where I said personal SG. People shouldnt have to do this to get IOs.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do not have to be part of ANY supergroup, solo/personal or otherwise, to get IOs.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Except that a vacation you take is also a vacation for your brother ( being he doesn't have you in the way ) thus 1 vacation for you = 1 vacation for your brother... thus a global share of the merits

[/ QUOTE ]

Your brother can't take time off from work just because you have some vacation time...

Oh, wait, I get it. You're saying not having you around is a vacation. Funny, but not really correct.


[/ QUOTE ]

True but at the same time he doesn't have to deal with you for that week your on vacation

[/ QUOTE ]Don't bet on it. MY brother's mouth cost me $160 bucks last month. And he lives 200 miles away at the moment. Close physical proximity has NOTHING do do with what damage/problems a brother can cause.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm willing to listen to ideas on how truly horrible content can get rated without having to endure all of it.

[/ QUOTE ]How about let the player rate without completing only one mission per week or month? To ensure that it's only used to get out of "bad" missions, the rating for such an aborted mission would always be "one star".

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. If you limit the Mission Architect to one or so bad arcs being added during the same period.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought of a question! With so many account wide unlockables in the MA, are the tickets going to be account wide/tradable? If some of the more awesome unlockables are pricey, it might be difficult for someone who doesn't stick to one alt to unlock them.

[/ QUOTE ]

When people play your arcs, tickets earned that way go into a pool.

You can then claim tickets out of that pool onto any character.

[/ QUOTE ]

Question:

Can you redo Reward Merits that way? It'd be helpful for people who play alot of alts and never accumulate many merits on any one character.

EDIT: Also, first after Redname.

[/ QUOTE ]

He said when people play YOUR arcs.

From that wording, I would presume that any tickets you earn by playing OTHER people's arcs are specific to the character that played. Which is how merits do currently work.

[ QUOTE ]

Funny, the more you guys list of these (which if you read my original post, I clearly said was pretty much beside the point), the more obvious it is that they give out information that changes later all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

These are also bits of info they no longer give out, as in the past, the info changed... and the rednames pretty much got crucified or drawn & quartered by a quad core rig. Despite [ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
THIS IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON INCLUDING FLUFFY GETTING A HAIRBALL

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ] type warnings.

I mean, common, the complaints & and even some vicious whining when we had an eagerly awaited event on a few hours early?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In that case, is there something stopping people from choosing two non-attack powersets

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]
Just like the Cimerora Surgeons

[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair, they did originally have attacks. But, IIRC, they then never healed.