UberGuy

[ QUOTE ]
I also posted a lot more behind the point of Dark being a weak Brute secondary than it's energy resist numbers, but I somehow doubt you bothered to read the whole thing. No surprise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ad homenim does nothing for your credability. You have no idea what I read or did not and would be better not to draw conclusions on it. I could have replied with a point-by-point deconstruction of your "guide". Instead I pointed out some glaring points highlighting innacuracies.

[ QUOTE ]
And thanks for disputing my "real play" and implying I didn't use any sort of numbers to draw the conclusion. It's appreciated.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please quote where I claimed you did not have "real play". I claimed that others applied, and I quote, "both real play and numerical simulation". Please quote where you applied numerical simulation. You provided numbers and discussed them. That's certainly not the same thing as the depth of numerical analysis and actual simulation that people like Arcanaville have done, and notably they came to rather different conclusions than you have. I realize you touched on this in your post, but you conclude that the Arcanaville's conclusions are incorrect because she analyzed ideal situations. I think that's inaccurate - more than just ideal situations were analyzed.

You provided a long guide consisting of some rather ridiculous claimes about how DA is crippled by its weak energy resists and what a weak power Dark Regen is (lol). You didn't make a post saying DA is bad for fury generation, you claimed it was a bad set all around.

That thesis is provably false. It's been proven by people who applied much better analysis, gave much better information and actually applied both real play and numerical simulation to the effort.

In contrast your post is rife with unsubstantiated opinion, such as the wildly innacurate claim that Dark Regen's basic function relegates you to tanking minions and LTs.

I will grant only your points about not being able to tank AVs (a problem DA shares with FA) and fury generation, and the fury point only if you run around with your mez toggles on full-time (which is what most people would do). The rest of your analysis of the actual survivability of DA is bunk.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You know an RMT farmer that has six accounts and haven't reported him?

[/ QUOTE ]

Where in my post did I say that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Per my previous quote, you said;

[ QUOTE ]
Since you're the one focusing on RMT, do you realize that most of them have at least three accounts? I know of one with six.

[/ QUOTE ]

I read that as;

Since you're the one focusing on RMT, do you realize that most of them (RMT Farmers) have at least three accounts? I know of one (RMT Farmer) with six.

That's how that looks worded to me. I didn't think that you might have been just talking about regular farmers when I read it. Looking back, I might not have understood what you were getting at.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I'm questioning is how you drew any conclusion at all about whether or not he was reported.

[ QUOTE ]
You know an RMT farmer that has six accounts and haven't reported him?

[/ QUOTE ]

Where in my post did I say that?

[ QUOTE ]
Ppl have come into this thread and specifically stated that this benefits RMT Farmers... Thats what I'm arguing against... because clearly it does not.

[/ QUOTE ]

See post above.

[ QUOTE ]
How is this a bad thing? Especially since I wont get any more "will you anchor" requests

[/ QUOTE ]

Since you're the one focusing on RMT, do you realize that most of them have at least three accounts? I know of one with six.

The reason it's bad in the limit is that they become the ones least affected by this change. The logic goes: slower/longer TF for more folks = higher prices for desirable pool C drops = more RMT business since they can still make large amounts of inf.

Are you going to claim it's good to make RMT inf sales more attractive because they have to pay for accounts?

[ QUOTE ]
*sigh* You said it, not I

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, because I run TFs I should have the contents of all their missons memorized. Right.

[ QUOTE ]
ALL RMT Farmers avoid Bosses due to the time it takes to defeat them & the added difficulty, especially with some of the more nasty bosses (like Death Mages).

[/ QUOTE ]

All farmers aren't RMT farmers.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, Ice Mistral has a minimum of 4. Why would that spawn Death Mages?

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect he's thinking of the maps with crystals, of which the outdoor map is one. The crystal spawns are special "objective" spawns, similar to hostage spawns. They will have bosses in them.

Not all maps are like that, though.

[ QUOTE ]
Clearly, because if you had run more TFs

[/ QUOTE ]

Remember me mentioning that you shouldn't say things that your ignorant about? That's a classic example. Until you either hear from me or start following me on my TFs you don't know jack squat about how many TFs I run. Quit while you're ahead, son. You're looking more and more foolish.

[ QUOTE ]
you'd know taht you'd STILL get 2-3 Death Mages per mob regardless.

[/ QUOTE ]

An 8-man relentless spawn will get 2. Not 2-3. Just 2. Please try again.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did you really just claim that people won't reset/farm a map with CoT on it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, a map spawned for 8 soloed by one... fighting 2-3 Death Mages per group

Yep, that'll go over well with farmers

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but you know, there are an awful lot of TFs on that list that don't, in fact, require 8 players. Shocking!

You need a spawn for 7 players (6 on "plus sized" reputations) to get bosses.

All you need is one map out of all those TFs that will spawn CoT and you're set. I don't run the TFs often enough to have all the maps memorized, but I'm sure there's one. Ice Mistral comes to mind.

You really need to post a little less like you think you know everything. Especially when it's really obvious you don't.

Did you really just claim that people won't reset/farm a map with CoT on it?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They won't. They'll get one and log out to reset it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that true? So you can farm a mission, log out, and when you get back in it will reset?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Our SG is getting ready to do the Quarterfield TF starting in a few days,
...
Now I'll feel like I can't drop without seriously hurting the team. I'll probably have to say I can't do the TF.


[/ QUOTE ]

So, why not arrange to complete the TF over a few days?

[/ QUOTE ]

That ability has existed since the game's release and I have heard of it being taken advantage of among people I am exposed to in game exactly three times in 45 months.

Not practical. Not enough people approach the content with that mindset. The devs need to acknowledge that, not attempt to more rigorously enforce it nearly 4 years later.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
llotg's are already going for 75 mill redside. 75 mill. you think the average player can afford that? hell, lighthouse, i've been known to farm a bit (not gonna lie), and i can't afford those.

[/ QUOTE ]

here's a hint... then don't!!!

The prices are set by the buyers NOT the sellers. If noone is buying at a given listed price... then guess what... eventually the prices will drop

[/ QUOTE ]

All that means is that people who do farm extensively will be the only people who buy them, and the reduced supply will match that. The price won't fall because the supply won't drive it down.

Not a reasonable stance, IMO, unless the goal is for a truly tiny fraction of the playerbase to benefit from those level-capped drops.

1) Why did it take until today for a post about this to be made?
2) How can inconsistencies with what is described and what people are experiencing be explained? For example, people are reporting that many of the TF spawns have two bosses even for 4-man teams. In a standard map, two-boss spawns are limited to 8-man teams.
3) Changes of this nature are inappropriate to fall under your "we don't talk about exploits" rule. This should have been in the test server patch notes. While it does address something you consider an exploit, it does so in a way that clearly impacts ordinary players (permanent loss of teammates on TFs is very common). There was a patch note mentioning that snake eggs weren't worth XP any more. This change was more deserving of mention.
4) If point 3 above is due only to "misplaced" patch notes, whatever you (collectively) are doing to generate patch notes blows. It is attrocious! Worse, this clearly couldn't have gotten any focused testing because people don't normally run TFs on the test server. As a result not only did it not get any "air time" it didn't get any testing by the playerbase - something you guys have made a point of using to improve the quality of your releases. How this could not only missed as a patch note but no one internally realized it hadn't been player tested completely escapes me.

The NCNC team has done a lot to improve my faith in them based on what I consider improvements in past processes and final product. However I consider the handling of this change a real backslide to old (poor) quality.

[ QUOTE ]
Just stay away from the market for a couple weeks, things will normalize quickly, you'll see.

[/ QUOTE ]

Until it does I'll keep making a killing selling the goodies I'd hoarded before the event.

I earned a lot of influence. Some people pseudo-PL'd their lowbies. Because I have never felt the desire to PL my characters (not meant as a statement of superior morality on my part) I PL'd the pocketbooks of my much-loved 50s instead.

It was a load of fun. Many, many many foes were defeated on both sides of the red/blue line. (I basically devoted one day to each side.)

[ QUOTE ]
That's amazing work!

/em goes back into the woodwork



[/ QUOTE ]

Heh. You have a truly apt forum name.

[ QUOTE ]
For example, malta turrets do not obey the general rule of "everything has base 50% tohit." They actually have base 75% chance to hit, over and above their 1.2 accuracy. They are not especially dangerous, but I've always noticed them hitting me a lot more often than I thought they should under SR defenses, and decided to test them. They are *much* more accurate because they actually retain their higher base tohit numbers from pre-I7.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that maybe because they just summon the same pet the players do, which has that 1.5 accuracy scale and thus a 75% effective hit chance against even-level foes?

If that's the case, is it possible all summoned pets who are just player powers act like this? For example, it always seemed to me that the Summoned Stone pets whipped up by the Legacy Chain bosses were exceptionally accurate.

Edit: re-reading your post you seem to be saying they truly have a 75% chance to hit, base, then 1.2 accuracy on top. If that's really the case that's definitely interesting and odd.

I'm one of those people who doesn't actually want to self-PL even the umpteenth alt unless they're 45+. Happily, I have multiple 50s who I can use to earn double rewards over the weekend, which I'll be doing with gusto.

Good times.

Then it came after me, it got into my hand and it went bad.

I sense something...a presence I haven't felt since...

[ QUOTE ]
I am Inigo Montoya

[/ QUOTE ]

"We face each other as God intended. Sportsmanlike. No tricks, no weapons, skill against skill alone."

You mean, you'll put down your rock and I'll put down my sword, and we'll try and kill each other like civilized people?

I'm not sure you read those two posts.

[ QUOTE ]
This particular toon is 47... Don't tell me... The new purples can only be slotted by 50s?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's correct.