-
Posts
233 -
Joined
-
And, of course, they completely re-did the shader controls in the 6/8 patch without documenting the change.
-
The Shadow controls have been completely redone. This is not documented at all.
When customized settings are off, you have a slider control that ranges several levels of degree. I did not check them all.
When set to customized controls, you now have the option of setting Level of Detail (Low, Med., High, same as before). You now also choose the range and size of the rendered maps. Apparently, this cuts down on the times on outdoor maps where your framerate drops while trying to calculate and render shadows from the far size of the visible zone.
It is bugged, in that every time you close the options window, the control reverts back to the basic slider. If you have changed the customized settings, they revert to whatever the basic slider was last set to.
Also, the help text next to the range and size settings are spectacularly less than descriptive. Doesn't really help me to understand what the settings are doing. -
People who act rude or stupid on the Interwebz because they're anonymously hidden behind their computers don't die of spontaneously-combusting brain aneurysms.
-
I'm not so sure the "check every 10 seconds" thing is correct. Slotting procs on Health and Stamina work that way, because they tick every 10 seconds with a duration of 10.3 seconds, but I don't think FA does.
According to Mids, FA ticks every 0.5 seconds with a duration of 0.75 sec. That means that you should see the proc fire every 10 seconds on average. It lasts 5.25 seconds and won't stack. So on average you should have the Build-Up buffing you roughly 5 seconds out of every 15, give or take.
But I have to say I've never actually six-slotted FA with Gaussian, so I've never seen it in practice. -
Since you mentioned tohit debuffs above, one thing about FA that often gets overlooked or discounted is that it also provides something like 60% tohit debuff protection.
Yeah, I know, a lvl 41 power to fix something that's mostly an issue in the 15-25 range. -
Any NAT-capable router (which yours almost certainly is, unless you bought some early-90's surplus somewhere) should be able to handle this automatically. In fact, trying to set up port forwarding is probably what gave you troubles in the first place.
-
Quote:Guess I should specify: There's no such building in Paragon that I'm aware of. Obviously there are plenty of buildings with courtyards in the real world.There very much are buildings where the main entrance to the building's interior is enclosed within an internal courtyard. The university building I studied in was exactly like this. Here, let me look it up... There you go! Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics of the local university. The side you see is the main overhang entrance to the main courtyard, but you can't actually enter the building through it, you just come into the courtyard through there.
Quote:When you find a map you feel makes no sense, do a /whereami and it will give you the full map name which you can later quote to the developers. These should be completely unique for instances. -
You took Confront and then Presence/Provoke? I don't think the Taunt set is worth it.
Since you're taking Body Mastery anyway, I'd take Focused Accuracy and six slot it with Gaussian's. I'd five slot Build Up with Adjusted Targeting. I'd get the extra slot by taking it from Conserve Power.
Too many slots spent on Physical Perfection. You can get far better return on them in other powers. It's also worth putting a second Performance Shifter: Chance for +End in; that averages out to a flat extra 0.2 end/sec recovery.
Since this is an /Invuln build, you'll probably want five copies of the Impervium Armor psi resist and the Aegis psi/status resist. That's 18% Psi resist by itself.
I'd replace the Numina heal/rech/end in Dull Pain with rech/end. You'll lose a miniscule amount of healing and gain a few seconds worth of recharge. You're already capping HP.
You may also want to consider more Recharge, perhaps Hasten. From my own experience, Fiery Melee has a very slow feel to it for a scrapper primary, which is probably a legacy of its tanker roots.
Finally, you didn't take Unstoppable. Unstoppable is awesome. Not strictly necessary, I suppose, but awesome.
All my $.02, of course. -
FPARN
On to business: One interior office map that really bugs the heck out of me is the one where the corridors run in a complete square with the map entrance on the interior of the loop. The elevator is usually on the "back" side of the loop. Needless to say, this map never corresponds to a building where the entrance is enclosed in a courtyard, since no such building exists that I know of.
I think there's also a warehouse map that behaves in this fashion.
Sorry, don't have the map names handy. -
Bug fix: The Peacebringer costume change emote causes the eye auras to stop working, until a power is detoggled. Toggling on a new power doesn't fix it but detoggling a running one does. Reported this ages ago and never fixed.
Suppress Close FX does not suppress the yellow Willpower aura effects.
For powers that use the Tarzan emote to activate... well, anything other than the Tarzan emote, please. And yeah, I'd take pretty much anything.
Wings: For my own take, I would like to see wings beat double-time when climbing and hold when in a dive, just as they do when falling.
Flight in general: Banking turns and/or the ability to roll. And an easy way to either perma-set a flypose or launch it in conjunction with a flight power. Binding powexectoggleon Fly$$em flyposeX does not work, unless you hit the bind twice.
Please find some way to put Power Slide back into circulation, preferably not as some god-awfully late Vet Reward. I know it was promised to the DVD edition crowd as an exclusive, but it's been over 5.5 years now. I think they'll get over the betrayal.
Adding a "blast-off" element to rocket boots would be fun, like a small burst of smoke and flame. Similar effects for the other specialized footwear.
That's all off the top of my head... -
Since nobody's mentioned it:
You give pets insps by dragging and dropping the insp to the pet's name on the pet control panel.
I think there's also a command-line command that will do it but I've never looked into that. -
Quote:It doesn't drop Invisibility. You simply can't use any power that affects anything other than yourself while pool Invisibility is up. Certain other powers are that way, like Personal Force Field.Got it. I guess I didn't realize that casting PA or any non-attack while using the pool Invisibility would drop Invisibility. If you're all sure about that, since I didn't see notation of that in City of Data, that is certainly a great reason to stick with Superior Invisibility. Thank you.
-
Quote:The originator is probably lost to the mists of forum-move history but I recall that it was a generalized reaction to the appearance of trench coats back when Vet Rewards first hit.... *makes a note to find whoever said "buttcape" first and force them to play OmiKron Nomad Soul*
It went something like... "That's not a trench coat. It's a jacket with a buttcape attached." But as I said, a lot of people (myself included) had pretty much come to the same conclusion before anyone came out and said it.
In other words, it wasn't a single person so much as a spontaneous movement. -
QR
I just sort of skimmed through most of the posts but I don't think I saw this one, so here goes (at the risk of offense).
During the 1930's in America, pre-WWII, there were a lot of well-intentioned intellectuals who thought that the fascist movement in Europe was the way to go. Top-down control over the social order backed by private industry. Heck, even Woodrow Wilson wrote a few admiring things in that regard. Of course, this was before the extremists took the ball and ran with it.
It's not outside the realm of possibility that the Reichsman Cole was simply an American fascist sympathizer who enlisted with the Nazi cause in the years leading up to the war. Or, if he was indeed a more mercenary version of Cole-Prime, perhaps the German nationalist movement simply made him a better offer. -
Everything is subject to interpretation, of course, but gadget-augmented skilled normals generally fall on the "Natural" side of things. Technology generally covers those whose abilities solely derive from tech devices, such as cyborgs, armor-suits and the like.
-
Quote:I think it's pretty much a given that an increase in AI smarts (depending on how it would be implemented) would mandate certain NPC factions get nerfed in terms of power. They'd be unplayable otherwise. Not doing it would be a disaster on the scale of the AV Regen buff. But this is a "What would you like to see" thread, not a "How would the devs screw it up" thread.In theory, perhaps, but we'd be deluding ourselves if we thought that better AI would see Sappers removed from the game. It won't. All it will do is leave them with Sappers, massive control, hideous damage AND better AI. There are far too many factions that are patently annoying even right now to consider making them smart enough to avoid the few weaknesses the AI has in overcoming their cheats.
Take a look at the concept of running enemies, for instance. I'm sure SOMEBODY likes the idea, but the vast majority of people just HATE enemies who run and scatter. Now imagine if all or even just most enemies ran away from you and tried to keep you at range, as well as scattering as soon as they saw you. Yes, they'd be smarter and yes, it would be more realistic, but does anyone REALLY want to see that? Just imagine all the various complaints of Energy Blaster and Peacebringer knockback scatter and apply that to every single spawn in every single mission.
Smart, yes. Fun... Not so much.
As far as scattering enemies go, we already have that to some degree with Cabal and Warwolves. They take a shot, run or fly in circles for a few moments, then take another shot. Not exactly stellar tactics. It's annoying, yes, especially for melee types. But it's neither insurmountable nor unbeatable.
In any case, "fun" is in the eye of the beholder. You want to knock down bowling pins, okay for you. I'd like something a little more dynamic than memorizing the optimum attack chain for a purpled-out FOTM build. In an ideal world, there'd be a slider or setting so that you can get what you want while I get what I want. -
Groups with contemporary military training, like the 5th Column, Council, Malta, Knives and maybe Crey and Nemesis should scatter for precisely the reason of thwarting AoE. Substitute "AoE" for "grenades and artillery" and that's how modern militaries are trained.
While I agree it would be more realistic to have the bad guys respond en masse when a fight starts, I also agree that is one area where reality has to be sacrificed for playability.
On the other hand, I could certainly see instanced maps having an overall "threat awareness" where the frontal assault gives the critters in the back an opportunity to bring other measures into play, such as setting traps or ambushes. I mean real ambushes where a group of baddies hide and wait for you to reach them. You could then give players the opportunity to detect and avoid or counter these traps. It would give additional value to stealth and stealth tactics for purposes other than simply short-circuiting the instance.
I would also propose that while smarter AI might make fighting mobs harder, that's not a bad thing in terms of presentation. If Malta were smarter, for instance, they wouldn't need Sappers. Smarter critters need less "edge" in terms of power and durability; the computer wouldn't have to cheat, in other words. And if you can make critters less powerful and durable without shortchanging them, then that would be one way to address the "more super" issue. -
Running Shadow Maps with Shaders set to High. I was outside the front door to the Talos Island Vault Reserve building when I noticed that the shadows for the monorail train tracks and the cars moving on them don't move and lengthen with the sun. They simply stay as if the sun were directly overhead.
This is especially glaring and noticeable in the "afternoon" when the building's shadow starts lengthening towards the track but the track's shadow stays put.
Maybe I just haven't paid enough attention to it. Is it just this stretch of track or do all train tracks cast static shadows? -
Quote:Well, that's the thing. In order to make UM work, they made certain changes to the graphics engine. Some of these changes run afoul of things in certain drivers and chipsets. Others simply seem to eat more CPU cycles, degrading performance.The thing is though, the minimum system requirements haven't really gone up. The game is just broken in certain environments.
The big question is whether the latter situation can be improved upon with the tech available to the programmers? I.e., within the limits of what they can feasibly, technically accomplish. I expect so and I hope so. I also expect that they're busy working to try their best. But we don't know what the outcome of that will be.
I, however, am very curious to see what the Friday afternoon Test Server patch will be aimed at. -
Pursuant to a conversation struck up in another thread, what changes would you like to see happen if critter AI were revamped?
Smarter? Dumber? Selectable difficulty? Special tactics? What?
How would you suggest going about making it happen? -
Quote:When I envision my own ideally-designed superhero MMO, I see critters that have modular AI scripts based on their intelligence, desired behavior and particular abilities, where the server assembles these elements when spawning the critter. Since I'm not a coder or MMO designer, I have no idea how insane this concept would be in practice. But that's the dream.That would be cool if we could. Perhaps one day. The critical issue is making "smarter" and "dumber" AI that were computationally inexpensive: AI burns limited server cycles. The trick is to make the AI seem smart without having to actually be smart, and I think that is theoretically possible. But probably a low priority for the devs, since "smarter critters" isn't something that improves the game in a visible way to most existing and prospective players.
There are catches, though. Whenever I've brought up the subject of making smarter critters, one immediate thing that comes to mind is making them scatter more so that they don't all bunch up in stupidly obvious AoE bullseyes. But there are always players that respond that they don't *want* smarter critters: they want bowling pins they can just mindlessly vaporize with AoEs, and lots of them. Making smarter AI optional within the difficulty settings allows players to opt-out of that behavior, but it creates a conundrum for the devs as to whether that actually means the improved AI creates a leveling penalty on players that opt-in.
If we were talking about a hypothetical sequel to this game, where there was no need to honor pre-established expectations, I know where I stand on this subject. Its a little more grey when we're talking about making changes to the game that will monkey with people's difficulty expectations without a balance-significant reason for doing so.
At the very least, I'd like to see the various critters in this game have one or two combat tricks to make them unique. For example, Nemesis snipers who hold their fire for a few seconds until their comrades get into position, then volley-fire in unison.
Rather than thread-jack, I think this topic merits further discussion in another thread. -
Quote:Yech. Hopefully, the tech they've employed in the MA for weighting power selections can be adapted into at least a primitive "checksum" value for development purposes.Castle confirmed my description of the powers design tools in the last closed beta, as well as my description of its limitations: in particular, nothing happens in an automated fashion, and nothing ever has happened in an automated fashion to the actual powers definitions. Its all done literally by hand.
-
Quote:Well, you've got to bear in mind that when the player base is looking at a power's performance, it's a matter of "OMG! Look how awesome Shield Charge is!"Yeah, I really like Castle and co. I think they're great, personally, and hate it when people attack them. I do think it's odd how mistakes like these seem to slip in game (or go unnoticed even though players point them out), but I'm not going to be mean about it. Hopefully some good things will get adjusted to how powers are changed from all this.
OTOH, when the devs are designing and implementing the powersets in the first place, it's "Now what value am I plugging into this cell on this spreadsheet?"
After the fact, it takes a certain, critical amount of feedback and data and an opportunity in terms of time to revisit the situation. Then more so to actually fix it, now that you're dealing with peoples' characters and game play.
Do I wish that the mistake hadn't been made? Sure. Do I think it reflects poorly on Castle that he can't intuitively translate a numeric value into the behavior of a computer simulation? Absolutely.But in the grand scheme of things, I don't think it's the worst possible shortcoming to have or that it makes him bad at his job.
-
Quote:Since you've said that, I'm now feeling the urge to make a public guess.I take that to mean that the potential exploit isn't fixable by its nature. I've no idea what it might be, but either way, if that's the case, it's probably in the game's best interest that we not try and dig this one up. :P
My WAG is something to do with A.I. behavior. Castle once joked about AV Ghost Widow being easy for him to solo by using patterns of emergent behavior from the AI routines. Others pointed out that as he's a lead designer, that's not "easy" and it could possibly be considered exploitive.
AI behavior is something obscure enough that the average player wouldn't notice but Arcana might. Depending on how you tweaked it, it could definitely alter the effectiveness of critters without being readily apparent what was going on.
Personally, I wish we could influence the "intelligence" of the AI as part of the difficulty. At the very least, I wish somebody would tell the Cabal and Warwolves that running around in circles isn't a battle tactic... -
Quote:The game doesn't display the same static frame over and over when it's in the background though. It continues to process updates. If you're standing where you can see activity you can still see it going on, updating with people moving, fighting, etc while the focus is off the game.Quote:I said parked, not parked looking at nothing or a wall. I'm parked in the D' with plenty of people and effects moving by all the time. Other people's characters coming in and out, flaming their flames, blasting their blasts. The works. Sorry, it's just not as simple as "it's in the background doing nothing so it's easier." It is still keeping track of the server, it's still doing meaningful updates. I see them dancing and jiving right now as my character sits on this bar stool. The only difference is that when CoX has focus I see them doing their thing at a lot less FPS then I do when it doesn't have it.
I've also tracked process priority this time. When CoX has focus, it's setting itself to "Above Normal" when it doesn't it's "Below Normal." This makes sense. The fact that it uses more CPU at Below Normal than Above however doesn't.
Anyway, the analogy doesn't fly. It's not a motionless car. It's doing pretty much everything it normally does from what I can see, with the notable exception of playing the sound and tracking my input. And there is a opposite swing to QQ'ng and nerd raging and that's being apologist. It's just as bad, IMO. Saying things like "the minimum has just gone up" doesn't cut it for me. If the minimum has gone up, I shouldn't be able to run "Minimum" at 74 fps when the application is out of focus. The minimum hasn't gone up, something has gotten borked up and hopefully it will be fixed up. On that, we can agree.
I find it funny to be accused of being an apologist, though, considering that earlier today I was defending the "it's eating CPU" hypothesis to the "update your drivers" crowd.
And while I don't want the system requirements to go up, unfortunately it's just a possibility that they may not be able to retrofit these features onto code that was first written something like nine years ago without consequence. That figure includes both lifetime of the game and a standard guess of ~3 years pre-release development time.