je_saist
-
Posts
4197 -
Joined
-
*naps on a cat-tree and imagines Neko Ali and DP in Victorian ball gowns*
sooo cute.... -
Quote:Rising Pheonix is part of a spines fire attack chain. You are going to need it. Fire Armor is weak on taking damage. So, you need to pick up your self rez.
This is my build for my spines/fire scrapper. Am I doing something wrong.........
Im fighting +1x5 and Im droping like Im naked in rush hour traffic. Suggestions
would be greatly appreciated
Give me a minute to bring up my own spines / fire to take a screen-cap.
***
Pictures being uploaded to here: http://picasaweb.google.com/je.saist/FireScrapper#
***
Okay, the key to any resist-based set, be it dark, fire, or elec, isn't defense. The reason being you have no resistance to defense debuff, and as a scrapper, tank, or brute, you are going to be in mob melee, not picking off your targets from a distance. Yes, you can soft cap your defense, but as I commented in an earlier thread: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=197779 :: when I did this on my own Fire Tank, the results were... horrible. In an average fight defense was often reduced to 0 and I was relying on my resists and recharge on healing flames... So get rid of maneuvers. It does you no good. Also, drop burn.
My own set here is actually due for a rework to account for the new Physical Perfection Power. I used a couple of Slow IO's in the spines set to gain a recovery boost, but I can drop them, put another slot into crushing impact, and gain more recharge. On paper, Physical Perfection should more than make up for the loss of the slow IO's in the Eden and Sewer Trials, and on Numina's task force, if I take it at 44.
I do, however, need to drop a power to free up room to take Physical Perfection. Which in my case is probably going to be Barb Swipe. I can put the Crushing Impact IO's on Brawl (or at least I think I can) so I'll still get the io buffs, and on paper, brawl should make the DPA of Barb Swipe... But there's a difference between working on paper, and working in the game.
Also, my build here has 4 kb IO's. This allows my scrapper to stand up against Mary in KTF and Loony the Mad in Faathim. You can really get away with less KB protection if you don't run any sort of task forces.
Plasma Shield: kb IO :: resist / endurance
Fire Shield: kb IO :: resist / endurance
Temperature Protection :: kb IO :: resist / defense
Tough :: kb IO :: resist / endurance
*** -
Quote:...Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
I was thrilled with the Science pack cuz I finally got payback on the creepy guy that kept trying to ERP with my tween heroine, by hitting the costume change and turning into a 10' tall monstrous escaped prisoner and telling him, "You gots a real purty mouf, now bendover and squeal like a pig fo yo daddy, cuz you my little puppy now!"
Haven't seen him since.
*falls over laughing tail off* -
Quote:Then it sounds like somebody in marketing wasn't clear on what the developers were saying. I'm going by what the developers said on the website and in interviews. It also wouldn't be the first, or last, time marketing spun something out of control.Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
JE Saist, AE was advertised as an alternate leveling path from level 1-50. It just was. On the AE Edition boxes, it was specifically listed as such.
So, if people want to use it to level from 1-50, it should remain so.
So now it's time to screw the lid back down on the mess. -
Quote:/emote headdeskOriginally Posted by BlueRaptor
I'm sorry, but that's just not true. As much as I think size changing powers are more trouble than it can be worth, power effects like that always scale to the character size. Small player character: small vines, small force bubble; big character: big vines, big force bubble e.g.
This isn't a hard concept here. Yet you manage to miss it too. Let me see if I can get this across to you.
Have you ever wondered... I mean really wondered... why when you go do a Hero Re specification trial... why... when you have the bubbly buff from the reactor... and you shift forms on an avatar... say on a Stone tank or Kheldian... why the costume changes on the player, but the bubble size remains the same?
There is a difference between setting the size and scale of an animation that's played on an avatar versus the avatar's current size in the system, and CHANGING that size by a player created power. BaB's already made it perfectly clear that yes, he can go in, probably with Phosyb's help, and set the size and scale of any object in the game. Yes, he could make a 500 ft tall fire imp, and I think several of us want to see one stomping down Liberty Lane in Atlas Park. EXPOSING that capability via a PLAYER POWER SET is not in the base source code. That is what is not in the engine.
Do you now get this simple concept? -
It's not a bad idea, but the concept is already implemented in the game.
The developers use synergies as a carrot on several archtypes and powers, two of which you mentioned, those being Defiance and Gauntlet. I somewhat doubt that the developers are ever going to back-port new synergy technologies to the existing powersets... due to the whole cottage rule thing that's going on. Probably the biggest synergy change upgrade players can look forward to is a change on Defender's Negligence.
The alternative future can be found in Dual-Blades. The dual-blades set, on it's on, is generally weaker per attack compared to other melee sets. Dual-Blades makes up it's lack of power with the various combo effects. You need to pull off combo's in a certain amount of time for Dual-Blades to put down the power or effects that other sets can do without even trying. We'll probably see more of those types of combo-specific sets turn up rather than a micro-buff synergy effect system.
Due to the balance issues, and the issues of making each Archtype Unique... I doubt we'll ever see work on a global synergy system. -
In other words: How to break AE in a single step.
Like or not, the current system fits the advertised bill of AE pre-I13. It's not made for leveling. It's not made for rewards. It's made for players to share story content with each other.
If you don't like that, and If you don't think the rewards are right, YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT AE IS FOR OR WHY IT WAS PUT IN THE GAME.
I wish I could say I was sorry about saying this, but I'm getting a little more than tired of the constant AE's not the same anymore threads, put it back, when the intent behind AE was made perfectly clear before the concept even went into beta. AE now fits the description of AE before I13. Period. Stop. End of Story.
Although no matter how many times I put that line in a post, some smart alek always comes back with a but... but.. but.. but... that leaves me either helpless with laughter, or trying to figure out a polite way to put in an epic facepalm picture, normally deciding to do neither since there wasn't any point in responding.
I think the problem here is that AE did launch with rewards. Players entering the game at that time probably thought that the reward set for AE was... normal... or intended, since they didn't bother to keep track of AE's long development path. In some aspects, some players have been pre-conditioned into thinking that everything in a game must come with an equivalent kill to reward ratio. Well, there is no guarantee by the developers that every defeat in the game is equal. Players are not granted an automatic boon that's equivalent for every action or event that is completed.
Thing is with AE is that there is nothing to fix on the reward side. A lot of players approach AE with the idea that the concept is somehow broken or nerfed because they compare the AE of now with the AE of launch, and the developer-created-content. At best that's a faulty comparison. AE has to be judged by how it accomplish's it's stated goals, and on that front, there are some legitimate complaints.
The file size for stories is actually a little small, although we know the size will double with Going Rogue. The system has a habit of not uploading changes to an already published arc, although since only I, and maybe 3 other people judging from various forum posts have run into this bug, there doesn't seem to be enough data to generate a fix or pinpoint a problem.
These are the kinds of issues the developers should be looking at. Not re-imagining the purpose of AE to fit players desires to level.
I think maybe Greg Dean put this disconnect between what AE is for and what players try to use it for in perspective with a commentary on the MMORPG genre as a whole. Check this link out: http://www.reallifecomics.com/archive/091203.html -
Quote:Once again, logic that's sadly lacking in the logic.
So maybe there is some way to do size-changing that doesn't involve massive amounts of work. After all, when someone throws Tenebrous Tentacles on a GM, those tentacles are likewise giant. So it seems like there's *some* sort of size check the game does. As far as the "giants being indoors" thing, I'm sure there must be some check the game can do to see where you are and gray out that power if the location is inappropriate.
BaB's already gave the explanation for this. Let me requote it since you and Anti-Proton completely missed it.
The animations for these powers that suddenly seem gigantic are animated against the Giant Monster, at the Giant Monster's scale. there's no Size Check going on at all. What's happening is you trigger an attack, the giant monster registers the attack, the system looks through the list of animations for an effect that matches the effect, then plays that Animation. Since the animation is already Pre-Scaled to fit the Giant Monster, you see a giant version of your status effect..Quote:There's a difference between setting the scale of an entity and changing the scale of an entity...much less doing that via the powers system.
I can make a 400 foot tall fire imp in about 10 seconds by changing a couple of values in a script. But I can't do that via a power, I can't make the imp actually grow to be 400 foot, there's nothing to prevent me from doing that in an office map or while standing under an overpass, and there's nothing to fix the dozens of different problems that come from having a giant anything in the game...much less a giant something that's player controlled. -
Quote:I guess I'm lost on the suggestion.Originally Posted by troy26
hey guys, I want to run two accounts well, but I don't want to break the bank to do it. My motherboard's a Gigabyte Ultra Durable 2, a 512Mb 8600 GTand I'm currently running a 2.4 Ghz dual core with 4G of ram.
Any suggestions would be GREATLY appreciated
If you are wanting to run two accounts on the same computer, an 8600 GT is certainly enough power. I can run two accounts on a RadeonHD 2600 Mobile. -
I'm still trying to figure out when Conserve Power got switched out with Energize since my own elec brute still had conserve power in the power listing after the I16 release, and when the topic came up a couple weeks ago, conserve power was still listed in the brute elec armor when I logged in to check by building a new avatar. I've heard some people say it's been like that since I16... only... it hasn't.
Still, nice to see the devs breaking that cottage rule when it makes sense to do so. -
Quote:Now, from the way you phrase your post, you are indicating some mean spirited intent on the part of the devs. Another take is that you are indicating some kind of conspiracy. I'm afraid reality is a bit separated to those points of view.Originally Posted by X_the_Gambler
Wasn´t there a secondary set called growth in the poll for the new melee power sets, which was won by Dual Blades an Shield Defense?
Why let us choose this, if it´s nearly impossible or to time expensive to do it?
Why talk about power sets or gauge the interest in game options if there's no actual intent to follow through? Well, lets look at HeroCon and the suggestion to allow Super-Speeders to run onto of the water level. Posi said something to the effect of "Lets Do It" after a quick vote during HeroCon. When the animators and coders actually sat down and thought about that example, it was realized that the idea wasn't actually that feasible on the current engine revisions with the current performance profiles. If you check out BaB's post history, he goes over just some of the technical hurdles.
The other thing that you have to keep in mind is that the polls and surveys that go out... Do Not Guarantee The Results. Hard to believe, but it's true. The reason why the results are not guaranteed is that sometimes stuff just doesn't work out. Sometimes an idea that looks great on paper winds up being a complete hash once coded into the game. Case in point, that idiotic massive fear on Burn. Looked great on paper to be used as a power to enforce the teaming aspect of the game. Wound up being one of the worst powers, ever, once the changes were actually implemented.
Now, stuff like growth has been demonstrated in Champions Online, and much like the water zone, players say, "Cryptic Made it work, why can't Paragon Studios make it work?" Well point of fact, Cryptic hasn't made it work. A couple of CO players who also play CoH have commented that Lemuria is one of the biggest ... um... screwups... ever to come out of a professional design team. The growth system as well generated a string of odd bugs, as evidenced by this particular post on a CO Wiki.
The other objective lesson is to examine the min system requirements, the performance envelope that I like to keep harping on about. CO's processor and graphics minimum envelope requires three times the computational power of the City of Heroes engine, circa launch of City of Villains. One of the big deals with our upcoming Going Rogue expansion is that the underlying processing engine isn't being changed, so, if you've got an older computer, or your looking at a Google ChromeOS netbook, chances are you'll still be able to play City of Heroes and the Going Rogue expansion.
With a heftier engine requirements, and a larger performance envelope to work with, Cryptic still couldn't get some of those design ideas correct. So, it's not a matter of a development team being tacky. Sometimes ideas are given before any real work is done to see whether or not that idea is actually feasible. -
Quote:... with Wet Ice and EA you're already at 80% resistance to recharge / speed debuffs. Toss in a Winter's Gift Proc and you're sitting at 100% blue cap. So I'm puzzled, very puzzled, as to where you are getting this greatly benefit line... because it doesn't.
Permafrost may be skippable, but the power has a lot of decent things to offer. Fire Res, which you'll be in need of, and -rech/-slow resist, which can greatly benefit you (especially in Caltrop fanatic situations). Add in the 3% def if you slot it with Steadfast, and you're making it even better.
Second, permafrost's fire resistance is 12.5%. If you cap it into ed, that's 12.5 / 2 * 3, or 18.75%. Okay, coupled with Frozen Armor's 12.5% resist, that is a respectable ~30% resistance. Yet, my own ice tank without Permafrost can mow through Nemesis, Circle of Thorns, and Cimerorans without issue, and those are the high level groups that use fire attacks.
Really, it's just best to quad slot Tough with Aegis Resist, Aegis Resist / Endurance, Steadfast Resist / Endurance, Steadfast Resist / Def. You can still be pressing an ED limited 57% resist boost and a 48% endurance reduction, while still benefiting from the defensive proc. -
Quote:As far as I know the only corset in the costume line up is under Tops With Skin using the Chest Type Leather.Originally Posted by dragonslay
Where is the corset costume piece found for female body types?
I looked in every set couldn't find it.
ty
-
http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases...-2009dec7.aspx
Several gamers buy Nvidia graphics cards for the Nvidia 3D vision treatment. While TriDef and Iz3D work on ATi cards... Nvidia's Polarized Kit is reported to be a better out of the box solution.
Well, as of next year, Nvidia won't be the only graphics card vendor with polarized 3D stereoscopic technology for the home market. AMD will be showing off Blu-Ray playback using existing Polarized kit at January's CES, on existing RadeonHD graphics cards.
No timeline has been given as to when exactly the kit, and drivers, will be made available to home users, or what graphics cards will be required. It's still something to think about though if your looking at setting up a Stereoscopic rig to play with. -
I hate to be a wet blanket... but I suspect we've probably seen the last of non-direct-travel-power locomotion improvements for CoH / CoV. The recent Natural Pack and AE release has sort of brought a problem into focus. More and more players are trying to find ways of skipping real travel powers, and ways of doing content while avoiding actually going to the content.
From a design standpoint, I can see the inherent perceived value in the lack of zone changes or actually having to go someplace that's not easily reachable.
Also from a design standpoint, that's the sort of design that tends to kill long-term interest. The game would essentially make the same mistake Planetside made. For reference, Planetside used to be a campaign based war-simulation. Commanders had to organize troop transport, armor transport, armor columns, supply chains, and other aspects of moving a large military force across a large open area. When the developers changed the Lattice Link System and the WarpGates to allow players to simply bypass entire contents with armor, supplies, or troops, interest fell off dramatically. Planetside gutted itself into a session-based game, similar to Unreal Tournament or Quake... and that caused the subscriber base to tumble.
Of the little information we have from HeroCon, we do know that Going Rogue is probably putting an emphasis back on having travel powers. We know that the zones are huge, and if I recall a post in the Going Rogue information thread, the central area in this picture could house all of Atlas Park, meaning that the buildings on the size are expect to be the literal size of Atlas Park.
Now, I know that there are probably several players who would speak up and say that further efforts to reduce actual travel time would help the game... but... looking around at other MMO's and the empirical sales evidence that is available, I think it's more likely that further modifying the travel system would do more harm to the player base. It'll just make it easier for players to avoid actually exploring the game, and that, that's a bad thing. -
Quote:Short version, no. I suspect that Finduilas used IO sets like Kinetic Combat, which tend to be very expensive in the market place.Originally Posted by New_Dark_Age
So with all my Armors, Energy Absorption, Combat Jumping and that Steadfast IO , one can reach the soft cap ? I thought Weave was almost required.
Just curious but how many enemies must you hit with EA to be softcapped on your build ?
I am also kinda reluctant to use the Steadfast IO in Hoarfrost. Since it is my main heal, I figured I needed all six slots to enhance the heal and recharge. If placing the Steadfast IO in Hoarfrost is the most logical thing to do, can you dispell my doubts please.
You can soft cap ice against smashing / lethal just by using SO's, combat jumping, weave, EA, and the Steadfast proc.
As to how many enemies, takes around 8 or so if you are using SO's.
***
Also, don't treat Hoarfrost like a heal, because it isn't.
It's a buff. You want to trigger Hoarfrost before you go into a fight so your regeneration benefits from the 800~1000 extra HP it can offer. This also helps you soak up alpha strikes before you can bring EA, Chilling Embrance, and your attacks to bear on the mob's recharge and hp.
If you're using Hoarfrost just to pull yourself away from 0 health, you are going to go splat. You're oh kitty litter I'm in trouble power is Hibernate. -
Quote:won't find me arguing. I skipped Permafrost on my ice / mace. I couldn't justify the procs for it.Originally Posted by Finduilas
I'd argue that none of those except the Steadfast +Def is worth the infl for a Ice tanker.
To the OP: Permafrost just takes resist sets, so anything you could put in it would also go in Tough or any other resist power. I think taking Tough would be more beneficial, but it does take 2 power slots compared to one for PF. But since the one resist IO you should really get is the SP +def and that can go into Hoarfrost, IMO it seems like you could find a better use for that power slot than PF.
EDIT: If you really want to go with Flight on your Ice tank, you can. I have an Ice/Axe that has Air Sup/Fly, no CJ, Tough but not Weave, and still manages to soft-cap S/L/E/NE. -
Quote:you can only use resist procs on permafrost if memory serves.Originally Posted by New_Dark_Age
What else can I use it for with IOs ?
So that's the Resist anti-knockback.
The resist +def 3%
and the Aegis Psi / status resist proc. -
Quote:with a sackthingy involved? lots of things.Originally Posted by NekoAli
*molts a few more feathers and looks at saist blandly*
Aww, c'mon. What could go wrong? -
Quote:By that logic, which isn't much of logic, Giant Monster's are not possible either.Originally Posted by Oneirohero
Even though this was a result of unauthorised hacking, the fact a tech-savvy used was able to make a really big character at least shows that having oversized characters is possible.
As for the engine not being able to create a powerset over it, I'll just have to sit and wait for a change there. It's like what I said before, today's explicit is tomorrow's possibility.
Also by the same logic, Granite Armor and Dwarf forms wouldn't be possible either.
There's a big difference between setting a static costume form or setting a basic size for a creature, and being able to scale that skeletal base in the engine.
While there's no question that a growth powerset could work, the question is how computationally expensive the procedure would be. Could it fit within the same animation and processing envelopes as existing powers? Could the engine modifications to the animation systems and power systems still fit within the same performance envelopes?
The short version is: probably not
So ideas like this, as cool as they might sound, aren't going to be a tomorrows possibility without changing the underlying processing engine. They are going to remain an explicit no. -
Quote:*eyes the trap*Originally Posted by NekoAli
*shoves an unsprung trap at saist*
Here's some catnip for you.
*sniffs the trap*
smells like sackthingy.... -
Quote:I'm not really sure what the mods position is.Originally Posted by Master-Blade
Yes I know it's an old thread. I'm one of the last posters in it before Cerulean_Shadow dug it up.
Are we not allowed to answer people that dig up old threads? It'd be kinda rude to just leave him hangin'. lol
the Necroed thread was actually aimed more at Cerulean, so I should have copied his post in, then put A:, then quoted yours and pointed to the current thread about Mutli-GPU support with the links to the hardware recommendation threads. -
Quote:WHAAAT?Originally Posted by Fedor
Heh, ummm hi Neko! See Sai was pickin on me sooooo I sets some traps and and...
*Hides behind the Puppeh.*
Hello DetraNekoDaKittehPuppehMutantGoldBay.
How dare you accuse sweet innocent little kitty me of picking on anybody!
I demand an apology and catnip! -
Quote:A: Necroed threadOriginally Posted by Master-Blade
Having a quad is almost irrelevant as far as CoH is concerned, and 2Ghz is rather on the low end of the scale these days as well.
As far as your other specs, they seem OK with the information we have so far... but things can still change any time. Release is still far off.
On a side note, doesn't CoH "hate" SLI.. or was that "fixed"?
B: see here: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=200612 -
I got asked about PAE and handing 32bit systems more memory even if an application can't use it in a PM.
Here was my response
Quote:It'll take me a bit to setup the .VDI images and feed one of my systems with enough memory for this.Windows Server supports PAE which allows the 32bit OS to access 4gb or more of memory : http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system...AE/PAEdrv.mspx
Windows Xp also supported PAE, but you had to enable it in the boot.ini : http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system...AE/PAEmem.mspx
Even then, process's are still limited to 2gb, and the OS will only read 3gb. Theoretically, Intel's triple channel setup would make this the fastest 32bit memory configuration, but in actual practice, it doesn't on Windows.
If you hand Windows 7 4gigs of Ram, or even 3gigs of ram, it will only use 2.5gb total.
Same with Vista 32bit. It won't recognize more than 2.5gb even if you hand it more.
I've got a couple of .VDI images I can demonstrate this on, which it sounds like I should.