-
Posts
5701 -
Joined
-
Quote:So your only determination of soloability is one's personal opinion of leveling speed?I understand that Incarnate abilities ARE character advancement, Bill. Much as SOs or IOs are. The point is, you don't need them to solo, much as you don't need IOs to solo. I would say that you need to slot some enhancements in order to solo, unless you are prepared to go at what I think everyone would agree is an unacceptable rate of advancement through this game.
However, you can advance your character to the point where you don't need to team to do any of the content. That to me seems to indicate that the team content should be made harder, not that the content should be made so that you can solo it.
In that case tanks and defenders aren't soloable to me under any circumstances.
I don't need enhancements to solo. Yes, it would be stupidly slow, but I don't need them. I don't need them any more than I need to bother playing the game at all.
The fact is that we advance our characters. How far we choose to take that is up to us entirely. I *need* all of the incarnate abilities to solo in EXACTLY the same way I *need* to play this game at all.
Stating that one doesn't need incarnate abilities to solo but needs enhancements at all to do so is not thinking anywhere even remote close to clearly.
There is NO difference between a lvl 5 TO and the +recharge alpha slot beyond the degree of the buff. -
Huh. If I yank the slots from health on my I-19 build I go from 1912 HP and 27.4 HP/sec regen to 1862 HP 21.1 HP/sec regen.
Think I'll stick with 6slotting health, thanks. -
Quote:So the only time you would ever team up to show off your multibillion inf build is when you're forced to.As a hardcore soloist in a VG full of hardcore soloists, I actually enjoy being forced to team for SFs. If "team only" content became soloable, I'd never team, and neither would my friends, and if there's one thing I've learned: 8 hardcore soloists can do AMAZING things when teamed and aiming for a common goal. The most enjoyable and spectacular moments in my 5+ years of CoV gaming occurred while teamed on a SF. SFs are the only time we get to show off our multi-billion inf toons to our friends. I for one look forward to being "forced" to team on the new Incarnate level content, and I doubt it will be solo friendly.
Ok. Dumb. But ok. I team when I get bored of soloing. Not when I'm forced to. -
-
Quote:Aett, I want you to read your own post again.That was me, Bill. I can solo without IOs. You solo at at extreme setting, and need IOs to do it. You don't need IOs to solo. That is the point. You need them to do the content at harder setting, but you don't need them to do the content.
I see the need for character advancement. I don't see a particular need to get the Incarnate slots for that to happen, that is my point. Certainly, you CAN do it, but you don't NEED to do it to play the rest of the game.
If, for instance, you couldn't do the level 45-50 content without using IOs, and you could only get IOs if you teamed, then that would be a problem. But neither of those is true. Teaming just makes IOs a bit easier to get, and so you can get to a point where you can solo at +4/+8 faster. But you can still get there even if you solo the entire time.
Now understand that incarnate abilities ARE character advancement.
Now see that your post makes absolutely no sense. I don't need to slot anything to solo from one to 50. I could make a character and leave it at trained level 1 with a combat level of 50. Seems like a pointless exercise to me. Much like ignoring any other performance boosting character advancement. Like incarnate abilities. -
Quote:These questions were actually part of the reason I gave up on this line of request.
So in a game that has catered to solo play, which mind you is a good thing, what is the problem of leaving a small aspect of the game geared to teaming?
If you like this idea, can you answer the following:
(1) Do you think the number of teams doing TF/SF content will drastically reduce like the number of teams offering PLs in PI did? If not, why do you think they won't?
(2) If the devs make it challenging enough to offer merits, do you think that everyone will be able to solo it?
(3) If not, how do you propose to help the people who currently can find a team for any TF pretty much any time would go through this content? Let's assume a FF def, Sonic def, pre pet emp troller, pre stamina tank, etc.
(4) Why do you feel it's unreasonable to have content that's team only, when the same rewards can be achieved in other manners in the game? There is no exclusive shineys (other than hami-o's that you can not get in game solo)
There are performance boosting accolades that one MUST team (or at least team long enough to start the TF/SFs in question) to get, so the precedent already exists in game for forced teaming to achieve comparable performance.
But to answer your questions:
1: I do not think that the number of teams running TF/SFs will be changed in either way were such events opened to soloists. They won't change because those that enjoy teaming team up. This change will not alter player preference.
2: No. As per my post, there would be ample warning of the probability of failure.
3: Nothing needs to change. There are already events in normal content that people fail regularly and seek help from other players to accomplish. I see tells all the time of people asking for assistance fighting some particularly nasty EB.
4: I personally find team only content absurd when I'm capable of soloing it. -
Quote:Hamidon is always solo. There's some more canon for you. Please note the single "n."This isn't an MMO based off of Batman, Superman, Incredible Hulk ect.
This is an MMO based off of the universe of Marcus Cole and Stephan Richter. They TEAMED with each other and got their incarnate powers, (they used to be best friends actually)
See the common denominator?
BTW in WoW, I'd love to see you solo the Lich King. Fraps it plz. -
And for whoever asked the insanely dumb question of "if you solo why do you need incarnate stuff," I solo and need IOs to do it. What's the difference?
With IOs I can run at +4/x8 w/ bosses and have soloed a good number of AVs. Without IOs, I couldn't do these things. With incarnate abilities I'll be able to solo some of the things I'm unable to solo now.
Incarnate abilities are character advancement. If you don't see the "need" for that, then don't bother even slotting TOs. -
And now you're also seeing what I spent years up against. It's just not worth it.
Mulitplayer means that you CAN team with other people. It does NOT mean you have to.
Thankfully there WILL be solo-centric paths for the incarnate stuff. It will probably be much slower than going the team route, but it will be there. Or at least, the devs have stated as much but with the recent overhaul they may very well have dumped that plan. We won't know until we know, obviously. -
The_Britisher,
I must start my reply with the following statement: I spent years requesting the removal of the minimum team size requirement for TFs. It's an arbitrary design decision that has no real meaning behind it considering the fact that we are able to solo these events as long as we can get enough people to start the thing and then keep one teammate on the team but logged off.
However, after many years of fighting this fight and covering every angle I and anyone else could come up with there remained a simple truth: The developers are avoiding idiots.
I'll repeat this statement so that it sinks in: The developers are avoiding idiots.
Explanation: The moment they remove minimum team size requirements, some mindless special snowflake will start the tf/sf without reading the big red letters stating "While you can start this event solo, it is designed for a team and there is a high likelihood that you will fail when attempting it solo" and then this twit will come to the boards whining up a storm that he's unable to complete said task and that this is unacceptable.
Make no mistake here: There is NO other reason to keep TF/SFs min team size locked. It is ONLY in place so that the devs can avoid the crying from those types of players.
It is no different than the reason that kheldians are blocked from the flight and teleport power pools. Some moron would choose tport twice on a warshade and then gripe about it.
So, as much as I back you in spirit, give up now. Save your energy for other things. -
lolblaws, while I do see your point, scrappers do tend to place more emphasis on their scrappers than they do their brutes. At least this is true for me and from reading the forums over the years, I've come to expect the same attitude from many of my scrapper brethren. It's even true for me even though I have twice as many brutes as scrappers.
B_C, again, we've no clue how that tank was built nor how the brute was built. If I have a brute with only 500 million inf invested using shield and super strength, meaning AAO and Rage, against an SM/WP brute without nothing but the occasional buildup and fury, yes, the tank could be dishing out more damage. Especially if the one has calculated a tight SS attack chain while the SM brute was just smashing away with whatever was up at the time. -
Slash, Swipe, Brawl, Strike, Swipe, Repeat
Real Cast: 1.33, .83, .83, 1.17, .83
Arcanatime: 1.584, 1.056, 1.056, 1.32, 1.056
Recharge: 4.8, 1.7, 2, 3.2, 1.7
For this chain to be pauseless, under the old understanding that recharge starts after a-time ends:
Slash needs to recharge in 4.488 seconds with 6.95% rec-red.
Swipe needs to recharge in 1.584 seconds with 7.32% rec-red.
Strike and brawl need 0% extra rec-red for this chain.
One item that messes this test up a bit is that since Slash is no recharged by the time the second swipe finishes, it adds time for swipe to recharge. However, it's easy to test around this by testing nothing but swipe, slash, swipe.
Here are the findings:
I always get the pause I expect before Slash can fire off after the initial chain.
Testing Swipe, Slash, Swipe always produces a pause on the second swipe.
After placing a lvl 5 To (8.7% rec-red) in Slash, thus covering the 6.95% needed, I now only have a pause before the first Swipe of the second chain as expected.
The problem at this point is that if I place the other lvl 5 To rec-red in swipe, sure, all my pauses will be gone, but it doesn't tell us anything of worth because the value of the TO is too high.
So I left the RWZ base's practice dummies and went back to Atlas Park to hit level 5.
But I went ahead and stuck the lvl 5 rec-red To in Swipe. I should not be hearing the not-ready sound anymore on the swipe after slash, but I am. Consistently. Doublechecking math: With 8.7% rec-red in swipe, it recharges in 1.5639 seconds. It *should* be recharged fully before Slash finishes its cast time unless somehow arcanatime is being ignored completely when dealing with recharge or maybe slash's root time is longer than its cast time and it's keep swipe from firing off even though it's ready to do so?
Now trained up to level 6. The lvl 5 TOs are worth 7.5% rec-red. I'm back at the RWZ test dummies. I only get a pause when attempting to fire off the first swipe of the chain after the initial chain.
If the recharge start time is occuring after cast time and is ignoring arcanatime, then the following is true:
Slash needs 1.223% rec-red in order for it to fire off without a pause.
Swipe needs... well, it doesn't need any at all. 1.056-.83 = .226 1.584+.226 = 1.81 which is greater than the base recharge of swipe. However, we know this is not true. I currently have 7.5% rec-red in swipe, reducing its cast time to 1.5814
Let's completely ignore arcantime for a second...
For swipe to recharge in 1.33 seconds (slash's stated cast time) it would need 27.82% rec-red to work.
Slash would need for the chain listed above, 31.15% rec-red would be needed. But we know that 7.5% rec-red currently slotted is enough.
So why is arcanatime apparently correct for calculating the recharge needed for Slash, but isn't correct for calculating the necessary amount needed for Swipe? I then stuck another lvl 5 rec-red TO in swipe. I know have 15% rec-red in swipe. 9 of 17 attacks with swipe set off the Not Ready sound while using the chain above. Just around half of them. So 15% must be VERY close to the amount of recharge I need in swipe for the swipe/slash/swipe chain to work.
Ok, what does 15% rec-red drop Swipe's 1.7 recharge to? 1.4783 seconds. How is this number relevant?
We have a stated cast time of 1.33 for slash.
We have the arcanatime of slash at 1.584.
Now we have a recharge time of swipe at 1.4783 that seems to be on the money.
I have no idea what it means. -
You probably could have posted the link rather than the list. The primary difference between the pylon test and the analysis I did is that we have no idea what the builds look like for the vast majority of those posting where the ST analysis had everyone slotted equally.
What we can do is slap the two together and determine from that where brutes and scrappers are these days.
Example: Take Gaidin's 291 Dark Melee/Shield Defense scrapper build, remove crits, add fury, adjust for the lower buff values for SD and AAO and we should get a very close if not precise DPS value for the brute. -
Arcanaville,
As per this post based on what you're stating here, followup/focus/slash should only need 283% recharge in FU to be pauseless rather than the 313% I had been using based on the understanding that recharge also started at the end of arcanatime.
I believe that every bit of testing I've done with claws showed a pause with anything less than the 313%, so my confusion here is wide open. Please explain. -
If recharge started its timer at the end of the listed cast time instead of at the end of arcanatime, then we wouldn't need arcanatime to figure out how much recharge we need in a specific power for a pauseless chain.
So... I'm betting recharge starts at the end of the arcanatime.
EDIT: Wait one....
Arcanaville states here: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?p=3244522
Quote:So now I'm confused. This statement implies that if I'm trying to calculate how much recharge I need in Followup for the FU, Focus, Slash, repeat attack chain, I've been doing it wrong.Arcanatime is only strictly speaking useful for attack chain calculations. But when it comes to things like computing recharge, its still the case (so far as we know) that powers begin recharging after their *cast time* expires, not when arcanatime expires.
Step one: Get arcanatime and base recharge for each attack.
Followup: 1.056 / 12
Focus: 1.32 / 6.4
Slash: 1.584 / 4.8
With my current understanding, I need the 12 second FU to recharge in 2.904 seconds. (12-2.904)/2.904 = 3.13322 or 313% total recharge needed in FU for that chain to be pauseless.
But with what she's saying there, the recharge starts earlier... the actual cast time of followup is .83, a difference of .226
Which seems to be telling me that the actual amount of recharge I need is (12-2.904-.226)/(2.904+.226) = 2.8339 or 283% total recharge in FU.
Which doesn't sound correct to me at all. -
What B_C said. But drastically change? Nahh, not really.
The first thread was designed around the concept of massive global recharge and tweaked up builds. In that thread the difference would be noticeable as fury would be dropped from the 90% I used there to the 75% I think to be the new cap for brutes when they aren't surrounded by tons of enemies attacking said brutes. Is the loss of 30% damage buff drastic? At first glance yea, but when you throw in all the other damage buffs it becomes less and less so.
The second thread, however, already used 75% fury as the baseline, so it shouldn't change at all. -
Quote:How did you get those in game metrics? Please share them with the rest of us. Every bit of testing I did in game with my brutes and scrappers matched up with the paper analysis I did for the "results are in" threads.
using in game metrics no brute is anywhere near the top. -
Still want my claws/shield scrapper.
-
Thanks for the kind words, BC. I am working on an update to those threads, but unfortunately it's very slow going due to real life and all of my in game time being used up farming for Rmerits to convert to HVmerits for two PvP IOs in prep work for I-19.
-
-
Unlike every other species, however, only humans have the technology to remove themselves from the Earth after making it uninhabitable for themselves.
Each of the species you mentioned would eventually find their point of equilibrium within their environment just as every other non-human species does.
I am not in any way stating this to side with the concept that the world would be better off without humans on it. It would be Earth without humans, nothing more and nothing less. Making the statement that one is better than the other is as nonsensical as stating that blue flowers are prettier than purple elephants. -
I'll continue to fight on the side of the one being that actually makes sense to me: Me. If it's in my best interest to save you for later use then so be it.
-
Scrappers don't get Brute PPP. They get stalker PPP. No Gloom. No Darkest Night.
Gloom very well could pull a brute single target DPS chain up past a scrapper chain with a similar build. Gloom is that good. And don't overlook that Darkest Night isn't just a tohit debuff... it's also a damage debuff.
That said, I'm not positive about adding gloom into the mix will make enough of a difference to push the brute past the scrapper. I haven't personally done the number crunching yet on just how awesome the new fiery embrace really is and didn't know until tonight that the extra damage FE adds to other attacks is also affected by damage buffs.
So: Damage output: I'm betting that the scrapper wins on a DM/FA combo.
Mitigation: Brute wins due to higher hitpoints and access to darkest night.
Working as intended. -
We forgot to add in another 9.75% DR debuff from Melt Armor.
-
Quote:That sums it up quite well.As an alternative to searching...
Soul Mastery rocks. Gloom is incredible. Darkest night adds a lot of survivability to any brute build, even softcapped ones. Dark Obliteration is fast animating to-hit debuffing AoE goodness.
My DM/WP/SM brute uses all three of those powers heavily.